Metcalfe

Metcalfe v. Merritt

Good Law
14 Cal. App. 244·111 P. 505
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 13, 1910Civ. No. 806.California1,595 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

James, J.

Plaintiff in April, 1910, as treasurer of the county of Santa Barbara, offered for sale certain bonds of a reclamation district known as Reclamation District No. 798, which district had theretofore been organized under the provisions of section 3446 et seq., Political Code. In response to the offer defendant submitted a bid to purchase ten of the bonds for the price of $1,021.20. Ten per cent of this amount he deposited with his bid. Upon his offer being accepted demand was made that he pay the remainder of the purchase price, which he refused to do. This action was then brought to compel payment for the bonds.

In the complaint the various steps taken preliminary to the organization of the reclamation district, with the proceedings had subsequent thereto, including those for the issuance and sale of the bonds in question, are set out in detail. It is alleged, referring to the offer of defendant to purchase the ten bonds, that the bid “was made contingent upon said bonds being legal and valid.” A general demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint was presented and overruled. Defendant failed to answer and judgment was entered against him for the amount "prayed for. From that judgment this…

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.