![American Industrial Sales Corp. v. Airscope Inc.](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![American Industrial Sales Corp. v. Airscope Inc.](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
American Industrial Sales Corp. v. Airscope Inc.
1955.CA.40918; 282 P.2D 504; 44 CAL. 2D 393
-
- 0,99 €
-
- 0,99 €
Descrição da editora
Defendant appeals from an order denying its motion to discharge an attachment. The action in which the attachment was issued was brought to recover money due under a written contract made in the state of Florida. The contract was silent as to the place of payment, and the trial court admitted parol evidence to determine the place of payment. Defendant contends that this was improper, and that in the absence of a provision in the written contract indicating that the money was "payable in this state" (Code Civ. Proc., ? 537), the attachment was illegally issued. Neither