McNeal

McNeal v. Foreman

Good Law
117 Cal. App. 155·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 385·3 P.2d 583
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 1931Docket No. 7658.California2,338 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Parker, J.

This action is based on a claim against the estate of Rose Foreman, deceased, filed by plaintiffs, in the sum of nine thousand dollars, alleged to be due for services rendered decedent during her lifetime. Plaintiffs Dodson and Stockton are attorneys at law; plaintiff McNeal is the assignee of one Sloan, a private detective. The action is founded upon a written contract duly executed by Sloan, Dodson and Stockton, as parties of the second part, and Rose Foreman, as party of the first part. The case was tried by the court, sitting without a jury, and judgment went for plaintiffs as prayed. Defendant prosecutes this appeal and as grounds for reversal urges four points, as follows: 1. The plaintiffs failed to affirmatively prove that the contract was fair and reasonable, there being a fiduciary relationship between the parties. 2. The plaintiffs failed to prove the performance or offer of performance of the conditions concurrent. 3. The claim of Mabel McNeal, assignee of Sloan, is barred by section 1498 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 4. The contract as to Sloan, the detective, was invalid as against public policy.

As to the question of the fairness of the contract under the…

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.