Roeth

Cummings v. Roeth

Good Law
10 Cal. App. 144·1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 272·101 P. 434
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 26, 1909Civ. No. 542.California3,585 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

This is an action to enforce the specific performance of a contract entered into by defendant Roeth with plaintiffs to convey land. Judgment passed for defendants from which and from the order denying their motion for a new trial, plaintiffs appeal.

The following are the facts averred in the amended and supplemental complaint, and in an amendment thereto filed by leave of court at the trial: That plaintiffs are husband and wife, and on March 26, 1906, defendant Roeth, being then the owner of certain real property, situated in the city of Oakland, entered into a written agreement with plaintiff, Annie E. Cummings, whereby he agreed to execute and deliver to her a deed conveying to her the said property free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, in consideration of the sum of $20,000.00 in cash to be paid to him, and forty gold bonds of the American Magnesite Company, a corporation, of the par value of $1,000.00 each, then held by plaintiff, J. J. Cummings, and which constituted a part of the only series of bonds ever issued by said company, each and all of which were of the same issue and value, and were payable to bearer, “which said money and bonds said Annie E. Cummings…

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.