Bartram

Theplaintiff, a corporation, brought this action to secure a judgment for installments alleged to be due and unpaid upon a contract for the purchase of land. The complaint was attacked by a general demurrer which was overruled. While a partial transcript of the testimony is before us, the points presented for decision are upon the judgment-roll alone.

1. It is the contention of the appellant that plaintiff’s only remedy is for damages as provided in section 3307 of the Civil Code, or for the specific performance of the eon-. tract. In this he is mistaken. [l] The plaintiff has the right to sue to collect each unpaid installment as it becomes due. (Boone v. Templeman, 158 Cal. 290 [ 139 Am. St. Rep. 126 , 110 Pac. 947 ]; Glock v. Howard & Wilson Co., 123 Cal. 1 [ 69 Am. St. Rep. 17 , 43 L. R. A. 199, 55 Pac. 713 ].) The action is not ex delicto but ex contractu and 'therefore damages need not be alleged.

[2] 2. Respondent insists that the alleged error of the trial court in denying the motion for nonsuit cannot be considered on this appeal because the ground of the motion is not stated. The only ground mentioned is, “That plaintiff has wholly failed to prove his case.” This…