Manor

Manor v. Dunfield

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 265·33 Cal. App. 557·165 P. 983·165 P.2d 983
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 1917Civ. No. 1638.California1,534 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

One F. E. Partain entered into a contract with one C. L. Sanders for the purchase of a Ford automobile. Afterward by agreement a Rambler machine was substituted for the Ford. There is no doubt that the said Sanders was the owner of the Ford, and there is sufficient circumstantial evidence that he was also the owner of the Rambler, although the direct evidence is to the effect that the latter belonged to the Sanders Brothers. This is of no importance, however, as it is indisputable that both G. L. Sanders and the Sanders Brothers agreed to the substitution of one machine for the other. The Ford machine was delivered to Partain, but, on account of his failure to meet the payments called for by the contract of sale, G. L. Sanders again took possession of it. Partain and plaintiff then entered into an agreement whereby the latter was to pay Sanders what was due, and the machine was to be turned over to plaintiff and used by him on his auto-stage line. It was further agreed that the machine was to be restored to Partain whenever he repaid plaintiff the amount of money so advanced to Sanders. Plaintiff then made arrangements with G. L. Sanders to pay him the amount due, the sum of…

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.