Vandelinder

Vandelinder v. Roberts

Good Law
1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 231·37 Cal. App. 404·173 P. 1106
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 1918Civ. No. 2252.California651 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

Appeal is taken from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the principal sum of $750, the alleged debt being one represented by the promissory note of defendant Andrew J. Roberts, which note was indorsed by the second defendant to the plaintiff. It is alleged in the complaint that the plaintiff and H. L. Hutchinson, in August, 1913, were the owners of an option to purchase certain real property, and that this option was sold and transferred to defendant P. M. Roberts in consideration of the transfer to the plaintiff of the promissory note first mentioned. The defendants set up several defenses, the substance of which is that an arrangement was consummated between plaintiff Vandelinder and F. M. Roberts for the formation of a copartnership to handle the property described in the option agreement, and that the parties mentioned were to form a corporation for the disposal of the property and that a newspaper published by defendant F. M. Roberts was to advertise the land among the negro population. Further, that as a part of the consideration Hutchinson and Vandelinder were to pay debts of F. M. Roberts then existing against his newspaper plant in the sum of $750, which they did…

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.