Pease
Pease v. Lindsey
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Conrey, J.
The complaint of the plaintiff stated a cause of action for recovery of damages for breach of a contract in writing for the purchase by defendants from the plaintiff of six automobiles. The defendant John H. Lindsey, answering for himself alone, admitted the execution of the contract, but denied the allegation that they had “wrongfully failed, refused, and neglected to accept and pay for” four of the automobiles. Defendant Butler failed to answer. It should be noted, however, that the defendants were sued as copartners. The defendants as such copartners filed a cross-complaint, wherein they sought to recover damages for breach of said contract by the plaintiff, and to recover moneys paid by defendants to the plaintiff in payment for certain automobile parts which it was alleged that the plaintiff wrongfully refused and failed to deliver.
The court by its findings determined that the contract was “too uncertain to entitle either the plaintiff or the defendants to maintain their respective actions for damages thereon”, but found a balance due from the plaintiff in the sum of $7,614.73' with interest from August 13, 1927, moneys received by the plaintiff for said spare parts not…