Takekawa

Takekawa v. Hole

Good Law
17 Cal. App. 653·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 16·121 P. 296
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 14, 1911Civ. No. 987.California849 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Allen, J.

The action was one for specific performance. The judgment and decree sought to be reversed in this proceeding is based upon a certain written agreement for the purchase and sale of described real property, together with certain executed oral modifications thereof agreed to between the parties. These oral modifications provided for the extension of certain deferred payments specified in the written agreement, a sufficient consideration therefor being shown. The trial court found that these oral modifications and the obligations thereby imposed upon plaintiff had been fully performed, and found all other facts necessary to entitle plaintiff to the relief demanded. A decree was accordingly entered in plaintiff’s favor, from which judgment, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals.

Defendant in his answer pleaded in bar a former judgment rendered in defendant’s favor by a court of competent jurisdiction in an action wherein specific performance was sought by plaintiff against defendant on account of and based upon the terms of the original written agreement without modifications. Upon the trial defendant tendered in evidence the judgment-roll and record of such former…

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.