MacFarland

MacFarland v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
137 Cal. App. 415·1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 806·30 P.2d 531
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 19, 1934Docket No. 8993.California908 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Sturtevant, J.

From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff enforcing the specific performance of a written contract the defendants have appealed and have brought up the judgment-roll and a bill of exceptions.

The plaintiff commenced the action as executor of the estate of Hancock Banning, deceased. During his lifetime Hancock Banning, Esperanza Sepulveda de Davis and Lucy Banning Ross entered into a tripartite contract which was the subject matter of the action. In his complaint the plaintiff pleaded the written instrument in haec verla. The trial court made a full set of specific findings of fact on which the decree was based.

The contract as found by the court is as follows:

The defendants state several points each of which is, in effect, an attack on the findings. In reply, the plaintiff makes a preliminary objection as to the scope of the hearing in this court on such attacks. He calls to our attention that in the bill of exceptions there are no exceptions on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the findings or any portion of them. He then asserts that this court may not extend its examination into the evidence. The plaintiff’s objection is supported by the statute and…

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.