Abrams v. Motter

In Abrams v. Motter (1970) 3 Cal. App. 3d 828, the court stated it was the plaintiff's burden of proof to show the defendant had failed to use due diligence to get a desired loan, because that was an essential element of the plaintiff's claim for relief due to the defendant's alleged breach of duty. The court noted that this placed the burden of persuasion upon the plaintiff, "even though in one sense it means proving a negative . . . ." This rule also applied when there was a request for declaratory relief by the defendant that he had actually used such due diligence. (Ibid.)