Roulland

Roulland v. Gray

Good Law
1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 104·30 Cal. App. 757·159 P. 457
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 15, 1916Civ. No. 1779.California705 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

This is an action to recover the balance due on account of the sale of an automobile alleged to have been made by the Roullard-Brown Auto Company to the defendant, the account having been assigned to the plaintiff.

The transaction for the purchase of the automobile was conducted by Hazel I. Gray, the wife of the defendant, and as part of the purchase price the sellers took her promissory note for $440; the machine was delivered to her, and the balance due thereon, as evidenced by the note, was charged to her personally upon their books. Notwithstanding these facts the plaintiff seeks to hold the defendant upon the contract.

A husband or wife may enter into any engagement with the other or with any other person respecting property" which either might if unmarried. (Civ. Code, sec. 158.) It would appear from what is above narrated that the transaction was one between defendant’s wife and the vendors of the automobile, for which she alone was responsible. The only evidence in the case tending to show that Mrs. Gray was acting on behalf of the defendant in the transaction consists of two inferences to be drawn, one from a letter written by him, and the other from an admission…

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.