Curtet

George J. Birkel Co. v. Curtet

Good Law
1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 451·36 Cal. App. 391·172 P. 165
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 26, 1918Civ. No. 2092.California819 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

Appeal from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and against the appellant Curtet. Plaintiff sued to recover a sum of money alleged in its complaint to be a balance due on a contract for the sale of a musical instrument. The contract was expressed in writing, the main portions of which set forth the terms of sale and a description of the instrument. Attached to this contract, and as a separate paragraph thereof, was the following: “I have read the foregoing contract and fully understand that George J. Birkel Company, or its assigns, will not be bound by any representation or agreement other than appears herein.” The signatures of appellant and the other defendant were attached both to this paragraph and to the main contract. Execution of the contract was admitted, the appellant resting his defense upon two grounds, to wit, first, that there was an antecedent warranty as to the condition of the instrument sold and as to the manner in which it would operate; second, that the consent of the defendants to the execution of the contract was induced by representations made by plaintiff’s agent that the instrument would produce satisfactory music and was in good condition of repair.…

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.