Sherwood

Action for the specific performance of a contract in which plaintiffs secured a judgment, and defendant appeals from the judgment on the judgment-roll and a bill of exceptions.

Appellant demurred to the complaint, and now urges that “The demurrer should have been sustained on the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the defendant, in that it does not state facts showing that the plaintiffs have not a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law.”

In support of this contention appellant cites us many authorities to the effect that specific performance will not be decreed except where plaintiff has no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. (Senter v. Davis, 38 Cal. 450 ; White v. Fratt, 13 Cal. 521 ; Duff v. Fisher, 15 Cal. 375 ; Imlay v. Carpenter, 14 Cal. 173 ; Moulton v. Knapp, 85 Cal. 385 , [ 24 Pac. 803 ].)

Conceding the general rule to be as claimed by appellant, we think that plaintiffs, by the allegations of their complaint, brought themselves within the rule.

The complaint is quite long, but in order to understand the question involved we will endeavor to state the salient facts alleged. By way of inducement…