Stelling

Murphy v. Stelling

Good Law
8 Cal. App. 702·97 P. 672
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 18, 1908Civ. No. 399.California1,466 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Hall, J.

This is an appeal by P. E. Stelling from a judgment rendered against him for damages upon breach of warranty upon a sale of certain apricot trees.

The action was brought against F. E. Stelling and Edward Stelling, but judgment went against F. E. Stelling only, and he alone appeals.

The appeal comes to this court upon the judgment-roll alone, without any bill of exceptions, and was taken more than sixty days after the rendition and entry of judgment.

In the opening brief of appellant but two points are made as grounds for a reversal of the judgment. The first is that appellant’s demurrer should have been sustained. The grounds of demurrer stated are that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and that the complaint is uncertain and ambiguous, for the reason that it cannot be ascertained therefrom whether the plaintiff purchased said trees from this defendant (appellant) or his co-defendant, Edward Stelling, and also that it cannot be ascertained therefrom whether this defendant or his co-defendant made the representations and warranty that the trees were of the Blenheim variety.

Appellant in his brief suggests no reason why the general…

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.