Tuttle

Mitchell v. Tuttle

Good Law
102 Cal. App. 16·1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 121·282 P. 534
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 15, 1929Docket No. 5783.California2,417 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Houser, J.

For the sum of $780 in cash and a promissory note executed by plaintiff in favor of the defendants, plaintiff purchased from the defendants a leasehold interest in a furnished bungalow court. Shortly thereafter plaintiff brought an action against the defendants for damages based upon alleged false and fraudulent representations made by the defendants to plaintiff in inducing her to purchase said leasehold interest. From a judgment rendered in favor of plaintiff for the sum of $881 and the cancellation of said promissory note, the defendants have appealed.

At the outset, appellants urge that in no event can the judgment stand as against defendant Belle M. Tuttle, who was the wife of her co-defendant. In that connection the evidence shows that, although Belle M. Tuttle was one of the owners of the leasehold interest which forms the subject matter of the action, at no time did she personally make or cause to be made either or any of the alleged fraudulent misrepresentations upon which plaintiff relied, to her injury. The only action taken in the premises by said defendant was that after the sale of the leasehold interest had been consummated, said defendant joined with her…

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.