Rosener

Rosener v. Hanlon Drydock Etc. Co.

Good Law
1925 Cal. App. LEXIS 541·71 Cal. App. 767·236 P. 183
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 23, 1925Docket No. 4864.California1,836 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Langdon, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment against him in an action in which he sought to recover something over $6,000, balance due him upon a contract with defendant by which plaintiff was to act as consulting engineer in the building of a marine railway drydock at Oakland, California.

The defendant denied that the plaintiff had performed his written contract set out in his complaint and also filed an amendment to its answer setting out that the written contract between the parties did not have incorporated in it all the terms of the agreement and that, among other things, and in addition to the written contract, the plaintiff agreed at the time that the written contract was made “to personally superintend the building of said drydock and to give said plans and said superintendence his personal attention, and that said drydock was to be designed and built under his superintendence and to be of the highest class of design and as nearly perfect as a drydock could be built and of such a character that the same could be operated by an inexperienced operator without the danger of any breakdown and without the danger of any harm or danger to said dry-dock or any part thereof…

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.