Roullard

Roullard v. Rosenberg Bros. Co.

Good Law
1924 Cal. LEXIS 314·193 Cal. 360·224 P. 449
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 12, 1924S. F. No. 10912.California2,624 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Myers, J.

Plaintiffs appeal herein on the judgment-roll alone from a judgment in favor of defendant in an action to recover damages for the wrongful conversion of a certain crop of peaches. The only question involved upon the appeal is whether or not the doctrine of election of remedies was applicable to this case, and, if so, whether or not the defendaht was entitled to rely upon it as a defense to the cause of action.

Briefly stated the facts were these: In October, 1919, appellants, who were the owners of a certain vineyard and orchard in Fresno County, entered into an executory contract to sell the same to one Johnson. This was in the usual form, providing for the payment of the contract price in annual installments and that time should be the essence thereof. To secure these annual payments Johnson executed and delivered to the appellants a chattel mortgage upon all of the crops to be produced upon the premises during the years from 1920 to 1925. This mortgage was in due and legal form, duly executed, acknowledged, delivered, and recorded, and contained the "affidavits of the parties as required by law. It gave to appellants the right to possession of the crops as soon as they should…

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.