Mauss

Mauss v. Kato

Good Law
117 Cal. App. 663·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 492·4 P.2d 179
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 23, 1931Docket No. 518.California980 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Barnard, J.

In December, 1924, the defendants sold to the plaintiffs a going business in Hollywood, including certain fixtures, stock in trade, and a lease of a space in a public market. This lease was a sublease from a party who in turn had leased the property from the owner. This lease was assigned to the plaintiffs, who obtained the consent of the sublessor to the assignment. The defendants had previously paid $600 to their lessor as advance payment of the rent for the last two months of the sublease. Plaintiffs paid to the defendants $2,900 for the business, including the stock in trade, the fixtures, the lease and the advance payment of rent. The defendants gave to the plaintiffs a “bill of sale” covering the lease, stock and fixtures in which they agreed to “warrant and defend the title to the said property, goods and chattels hereby conveyed, against the just and lawful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever”. The plaintiffs took possession, paid the rent to the sublessor, secured additional space, remodeled the fixtures, and continued in business for about two years and six months. They then received a letter from a referee in bankruptcy purporting to represent the original…

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.