Cutting

Rudolph Wurlitzer Co. v. Cutting

Good Law
66 Cal. App. 38·225 P. 11
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 1924Civ. No. 4593.California747 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sturtevant, J.

The plaintiff commenced an action against the defendants to recover the unpaid balance alleged to be due on the sale by the plaintiff of a certain piano. The trial court awarded a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and the defendants have appealed.

The judgment of the trial court was based on findings of fact which included, among others, a finding:

On the trial the plaintiff called an outside salesman, Mr. Carr, who testified that he called on Mr. Cutting at the Daisy Farm Inn and also at Mr. Cutting’s office in the Security Bank Building in Oakland. Mr. Carr testified that the Daisy Farm Inn was a restaurant and that it had, among other appurtenances, a dancing floor. He further testified that on June 2d, Mr. and Mrs. Cutting went with him into the store owned by the plaintiff and that after the musical instruments were exhibited to Mr. and Mrs. Cutting that Mr. Cutting made the remark that the instrument mentioned in the findings “would ¡be most satisfactory in our place.” Later on the same day the sales contract above referred to was signed and a few days later the musical instrument was put in place in accordance with the terms of the sales contract. The subscribing…

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.