Phillips

Phillips v. Kingham

Good Law
105 Cal. App. 519·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 761·288 P. 116
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 7, 1930Docket No. 4042.California347 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finch, J.

The plaintiff sold and delivered to the defendant a new automobile at the price of $1800 and agreed to accept a second-hand automobile as payment on the purchase price in the amount of $950, the remainder being paid in cash. The defendant was unable to transfer the old automobile to the plaintiff because a finance company held title thereto and the certificate of ownership thereof, it having held the title and certificate at the time the defendant purchased such automobile and at all times thereafter. Upon the defendant’s failure to make the transfer the plaintiff brought this action to recover $950, the sum for which the plaintiff had agreed to accept the old automobile in payment on the price of the new. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant and, on motion of the plaintiff, the court granted a new trial on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence to warrant the verdict. The defendant has appealed from the order granting a new trial.

“The trial court is not bound by the rule of conflicting evidence as is the appellate tribunal; nor is it bound by the finding of the jury in passing upon a motion for a new trial on the ground of insufficiency of evidence to…

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.