Milliken

Hale Bros. v. Milliken

Good Law
142 Cal. 134·1904 Cal. LEXIS 910·75 P. 653
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 1904S.F. No. 2835.California2,230 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

Motion to discharge the writ of attachment issued in the cause. It appears from the complaint that plaintiff leased a piece of land in San Francisco with a view to erecting a building thereon in which to conduct its business; in January, 1900, plaintiff began negotiations with defendants for the necessary structural steel required for the building, and defendants submitted two lists of prices—one for delivery in February, 1900, and the other for May delivery, the former calling for a higher price than the latter; that plaintiff informed defendant at this time that it had leased the lands on which the building was to be erected, and would have to pay the rental of fourteen hundred dollars per month from and after July 1st, and that it was necessary for plaintiff to complete and occupy the building by that time, but that it could not be then completed and occupied unless the steel should be all delivered during the month of February; that accordingly defendants agreed to make delivery in that month, and plaintiff, in consideration of the earlier delivery, agreed to pay the higher price, amounting to a difference of something over four thousand dollars; that plaintiff performed all…

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.