Munroe

Munroe v. Fette

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 333·1905 Cal. App. LEXIS 40·82 P. 206
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 20, 1905No. 17.California389 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Allen, J.

Without noticing the many other assignments of error raised by the bill of exceptions, and on considera^ tion of which the court granted a new trial, it is sufficient upon this appeal to call attention to instruction No. 10, which reads as follows: “ You are instructed that if you find that certain of the property in question was held by Mrs. Stella Mun-roe under the lease from Barker Brothers with the privilege of purchasing the same, and that defendants furnished money as a part of the purchase price of said property described in the complaint to pay the balance to be paid thereon to said Barker Brothers necessary to secure the title to said property, and that plaintiff claims' title to said property so purchased from said Barker Brothers, or any interest therein, by reason of such payment by Mrs. Stella Munroe to them from moneys so furnished by defendants, or either of them, without offering to refund said moneys, then said plaintiff by so doing ratified the sale to defendants by which said money was derived.”

This instruction proceeds upon the theory that the fact of part payment by plaintiff’s wife from the proceeds of the sale to defendants precluded plaintiff from…

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.