McCarl

McCarl v. Kroupa

Good Law
102 Cal. App. 277·1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 77·282 P. 959
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 3, 1929Docket No. 7023.California619 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sturteyant, J.

The plaintiffs sued the defendants for moneys received. The defendants filed separate demurrers to plaintiffs’ amended complaint, the demurrers were sustained without leave to amend and judgment was entered in favor of the defendants. The plaintiffs appealed and have brought up the judgment-roll. The record does not show that the plaintiffs asked leave to amend and we may therefore assume that they did not ask leave.

In their amended complaint the plaintiffs allege that they are husband and wife; that the defendant Kroupa is a licensed real estate broker; that the National Surety Company is a corporation and is the bondsman of Kroupa; that on November 25, 1925, the plaintiffs, as owners, delivered to Kroupa a writing authorizing him to sell their lands; in that document the lands are described and Kroupa is authorized to sell the lands for $21,000. It is provided in the writing that the first payment will be not less than $1,000 and to be considered as a deposit on the sale. That the balance of the purchase price of $20,000 will be secured by a first deed of trust on the lands. There is a covenant that the purchaser will give a bond indemnifying the sellers against Hens arising…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.