McAuliff

McAuliff v. McFadden

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 655·42 Cal. App. 505·183 P. 870
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 30, 1919Civ. No. 2159.California2,521 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finlayson, J.

This is an action for reformation of a contract, for the recovery of $421.07 alleged to have been paid by plaintiff on the contract, and for the further sum of two thousand dollars damages alleged to have been suffered by reason of the defendants’ breach of the contract. From a judgment in favor of defendants; plaintiff appeals. The contract was one for the sale to plaintiff of certain real property.

The appeal is prosecuted under the “alternative method,” and a lengthy typewritten reporter’s and clerk’s transcript is presented to us as the record on appeal. No part of the record is printed in respondents’ brief, or in any supplement thereto. In appellant’s brief there is printed the findings, in full, fragments of the pleadings, and a few excerpts from the testimony of the witnesses. [1] As appellant is only required to print in his brief such portions of the record as may be necessary to present to this court, fairly and lucidly, the points upon which he relies (De Bock v. De Bock (Cal. App.), 184 Pac. 890 ), we think enough is printed in appellant’s brief to necessitate a consideration by us of the principal question presented by his appeal. [2] We cannot, however, consider…

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.