Kendall

Kendall v. Vallejo

Good Law
1 Cal. 371
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 15, 1851California550 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bennett, J.

By the Court,

The complaint is founded itpom a special contract, by which the plaintiff agreed to build a *372 corral for the defendant for the sum of $2400, and it alleges that the work was completed within the time, and of the dimensions, required by the contract. The answer denies the making of the contract, and also that the “ plaintiff built and completed “ a corral for the defendant in manner and form as the plaintiff “ has above thereof complained.”

At the trial the defendant offered to prove, “ that the corral “ mentioned and described in the complaint was not built in a “ workmanlike manner, and that it would not answer the pur- “ pose for which it was intended.” This offer was overruled by the court, and the proposition thus presented forms the only point in the case.

Under the new system of practice- adopted in this state, the plaintiff is required to set forth in his complaint a statement of the facte constituting his cause of action, {Practice Act, sec. 38,) and the defendant, in his answer, a general or specific denial of each allegation of the complaint controverted by him, and a statement of any neve matter constituting a defense, (id. sec. 45.)

We think that…

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.