Contracts · MBE-tested
SAMUEL McKEOWN, Appellant, v. H. O. BEATTY et al., Respondents
1 Cal. Unrep. 190·Supreme Court of California·1865·CA
We concur: Currey, J.; Rhodes,'J.; Sanderson, C. J.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
SAMUEL McKEOWN, Appellant, v. H. O. BEATTY et al., Respondents.
No. 430;
March 6, 1865.
Payment — Legal Tender Act. — A Judgment on a Contract entered into before the passing of the national legal tender acts is payable in such treasury notes as are specified in such acts, unless the contract expressly provided for payment in gold.
APPEAL from Sixth Judicial District, Sacramento County.
H. H. Hartley for appellant; H. 0. Beatty, J. P. Counts, and Porter & ITolladay for respondents.
[MAJORITY — SAWYER, J.]
SAWYER, J.
The contract upon which the judgment was entered having been executed before the passage of the acts of Congress, making treasury notes a legal tender in payment of debts, the only question is whether the judgment can be satisfied by payment in such treasury notes as are specified in said acts.
We have recently decided the question in the case of Higgins v. Bear River and Auburn Water and Mining Company, 27 Cal. 153. And on the authority of that ease the order appealed from is affirmed.
We concur: Currey, J.; Rhodes,'J.; Sanderson, C. J.