Cramer

M. Kanter Silk Corp. v. Cramer

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 755·1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1073·30 P.2d 53
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 20, 1934Docket No. 9311.California1,449 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sturtevant, J.

From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff the defendant L. H. Cramer has appealed. In its complaint the plaintiff pleaded a written guaranty and prayed for a judgment based thereon. On the calling of the case counsel made an opening statement. That statement and the reply thereto took the form of stipulations, from which it appeared that the plaintiff is a silk merchant. The defendant Cramer and one Goldstein owned two businesses—Varsity Frocks and Patsy Frocks. Both were incorporated and the stock was owned jointly by Cramer and Goldstein. Varsity Frocks was a manufacturing organization. Patsy Frocks was a retailing organization. The plaintiff had been selling goods to the Varsity Frocks. The latter manufactured the goods, and Patsy Frocks retailed them. Commencing in March, 1930, the plaintiff sold to Varsity Frocks Ltd. large quantities of drygoods. Each invoice had indorsed on it “terms”. Prior to the execution of the guaranty on some of the invoices the terms were 6 per cent in 60 days, some 7 per cent in 10 days, some 8 per cent in 10 days, etc. After the date of the guaranty the credit given was 6 per cent in 60 days. On February 31, 1930, there was a balance due and…

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.