Spaulding

Spaulding v. O'Connor

Good Law
1927 Cal. App. LEXIS 30·87 Cal. App. 82·261 P. 766
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 1927Docket No. 5971.California1,249 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

King, J.

— Plaintiff bought certain real estate at an auction sale conducted by defendants, who were real estate agents and auctioneers. He paid $23,600. After the date of sale, the making of a deposit of $1,000, and final payment and receipt of a deed he discovered that the property was materially smaller in size than was represented by the defendants, brought the action against the defendants for damages without joining the former owners of the property, and recovered $4,545.

Defendants appeal, claiming (1) That the evidence does not support the findings and (2) That the judgment is against law.

The representations as to size of the property were made by a newspaper advertisement, by a map posted on the property at the time of the sale and by one defendant orally at the time he was conducting the auction, but it nowhere appears that either defendant knowingly made a false statement of the size.

As to the first claim of the appellants it appears that complaint is made of paragraph 3 of the findings where it is found that “plaintiff had no knowledge or information as to the. name of the owner or owners of the property at the time he purchased same . . . and the name of such owner or…

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.