Elam

Elam v. Arzaga

Good Law
122 Cal. App. 742·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 1217·10 P.2d 805
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 21, 1932Docket No. 8246.California1,870 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Spence, J.

In this action in ejectment and to quiet title defendant had judgment, from which judgment and the order denying plaintiff’s motion under sections 663 and 663a of the Code of Civil Procedure plaintiff appeals.

The background of this litigation is found in the dealings of plaintiff, an attorney at law, ' with certain Mexicans who had little ability to understand the English language and had little or no ability to understand the significance of the documents and proceedings to which reference is hereinafter made. One Lopez loaned the sum of $65 to one Tapia. When the loan was made to Tapia, defendant Arzaga orally agreed to pay Lopez if Tapia did not do so. The money was not repaid and Lopez consulted plaintiff, who had his office with the Universal Adjustment Company, a collection agency. It appears, as found by the trial court,, that plaintiff and G. C. Dilsaver were partners conducting said collection agency, although plaintiff testified, when asked if he was a partner, that he did not know whether he was or not; that he was “at one time or was supposed to be”. Lopez signed a rather unusual document which appears to be the form used by the Universal Adjustment Company. We will…

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.