McDonald v. Plumb

12 Cal. App. 3d 374 (1970)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

McDonald v. Plumb

California Court of Appeal for the Second District
12 Cal. App. 3d 374 (1970)

Facts

Elizabeth Esterline owned property in Los Angeles. On June 22, 1960, Stanley Scott Singley forged Esterline’s signature on a deed, falsely transferring her Los Angeles property to Frank N. Debbas. Glen E. Plumb (defendant) was the notary public who acknowledged the forged signature. Debbas then deeded the property over to the forger, Singley, without consideration. Singley transferred the deed to Jack W. McDonald and Patricia L. McDonald (plaintiffs). Upon discovering the fraud, the McDonalds sued Singley and Plumb for damages. A judge held that the property still belonged to Esterline, free of any claims from Singley and the McDonalds. The judge also ordered Singley to pay the McDonalds $21,063.51, plus $254.88 in costs. However, the judge denied relief against Plumb, ruling that the notary’s false acknowledgement was not an actionable cause of the McDonalds’ harm. The McDonalds appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Allport, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 748,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 748,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 748,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership