Burt

Burt v. Philadelphia Shoe Co.

Good Law
118 Cal. App. 50·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 144·4 P.2d 612
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 30, 1931Docket No. 7786.California736 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

The above action was upon two counts for shoes sold and delivered to defendant the claims for which were assigned to plaintiff. The first was for a balance of $1195.18, alleged to be due to Arch-Aid Shoe Company, a corporation, and the second for $153.77, claimed by the Menihan Company, also a corporation.

After the suit was brought defendant paid to Arch-Aid Shoe Co. $500, which was accepted and credited upon its claim at the time of the trial. As against the balance of this account defendant set up two counterclaims, one for damages in the sum of $750, alleged to be due to the fact that certain shoes sold by sample were defective and not equal to the sample; the other for a sum alleged to be due under a contract between defendant and the shoe company by which the latter agreed to pay one-half of the cost of erecting and maintaining an electric sign, advertising its shoes. Defendant further alleged that $87.47 had been paid upon the claim of the Menihan Company.

The court found that Arch-Aid Shoe Co. sold and delivered to defendant certain shoes for an agreed price, of which at the time of the assignment the sum of $695.18 was unpaid; but it further found that the allegations…

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.