Hopkins

Hopkins v. Orcutt

Good Law
51 Cal. 537
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1876No. 5303California292 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

The action is to recover a balance alleged to be due on “ a mutual, open or current account” for personal property sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant. The court finds that in June, 1872, the plaintiff sold to the defendant certain improvements on public land for $1,000, of which there was paid the sum of $450 on the seventeenth of June, and it was then agreed that the defendant should have a credit of one year for the remainder; that subsequently there were mutual dealings and an open, running account between the parties with mutual credits and debits; that there was a settlement of these accounts in July, 1872, and again in December, 1874, at which all the dealings between the parties were adjusted and the balance ascertained, except the balance due for the improvements, which was not included in either settlement. On the last settlement there was ascertained to be a balance of $49 due to the plaintiff, ■which of course was exclusive of the balance due for the improvements, that item not having entered into the settlement. The court entered a judgment for the plaintiff, not only for the $49, but also for the $550, due for the improvements, with interest. But we…

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.