McElhaney

McElhaney v. McPherson

Good Law
12 Cal. App. 678·1910 Cal. App. LEXIS 303·108 P. 525
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 1910Civ. No. 657.California995 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Hall, J.

Plaintiff appealed from the judgment in favor of the defendant and the order denying his motion for a new trial.

The action was brought to recover from defendant the sum of $725, which it is alleged she orally promised to pay plaintiff in consideration of the release and discharge by plaintiff of an antecedent and existing obligation due to plaintiff from one S. A: McPherson (the husband of defendant). (Civ. Code, see. 2794, subd. 3.)

The court found in favor of plaintiff as to the existence of the obligation alleged to be due from S. A. McPherson to plaintiff, but found that defendant did not promise or agree to pay plaintiff $725, or any other sum, for a release or discharge of such obligation, and that plaintiff did not cancel or release such obligation.

Plaintiff attacks the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings in favor of defendant.

That the evidence in the record is sufficient to support the finding that defendant did not promise or agree to pay plaintiff the sum of $725 or any other sum we have no doubt.

Plaintiff and S. A. McPherson had had certain dealings for the sale of certain land belonging to said McPherson. S. A. McPherson had sued plaintiff, 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.