Foster

Foster v. De Venney

Good Law
107 Cal. App. 500·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 362·290 P. 462
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 30, 1930Docket No. 260.California1,292 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Cary, J.

Plaintiff is administratrix of the estate of Mary Henman, deceased. Deceased, an elderly spinster whose eyesight and hearing were defective, was the owner of the land which is the subject of this litigation. Having but little experience in business affairs, she relied in such matters upon the advice of one Crandall. She lived on the northwest portion of this property and the remainder was occupied by a dilapidated hotel building. A seven thousand dollar mortgage encumbered the entire parcel. Unable to meet the rising tide of taxation and assessments she contacted a realtor, Chittick, with the request that he find a purchaser. In due course he produced defendant. Deceased referred defendant and Chittick to Crandall with whom they briefly discussed the proposed sale. A rough memorandum of the terms drawn by Chittick was shown to Crandall who expressed his approval. At this point there is a conflict in the evidence. Defendant claims that the agreement of sale as finally executed corresponded with the terms of the rough draft shown Crandall. Crandall on the contrary testified that the final agreement differed materially from the one approved by him. He stated that from his…

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.