Whittaker

This is an action to rescind a contract for the purchase and sale of real property. When the cause was called for trial on the issues of fact joined by the pleadings, the court, upon the objection of the defendant, refused to allow the plaintiff to introduce any evidence, on the ground that the amended complaint failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Such ruling was equivalent to an order sustaining a general demurrer. (Moore v. Douglas, 132 Cal. 399 [ 64 Pac. 705 ] ; Spaeth v. Ocean Park etc. Inv. Co., 16 Cal. App. 329 [ 116 Pac. 980 ].) Judgment was thereupon entered that the plaintiff take nothing by his action, and defendant recover its costs. The plaintiff has appealed.

Two questions are presented for consideration. Does the amended complaint state a cause of action, and if so, had the superior court jurisdiction of the action? Among other matters, it is alleged in the amended complaint that on or about January 5, 1928, the defendant agreed to sell, and the plaintiff to buy, a tract of land, being lot 133, tract 10259, book 151, pages 73 to 78, inclusive, map records of Los Angeles County, in accordance with a certain agreement which is attached to…