Wristen

Wristen v. Bowles

Good Law
1889 Cal. LEXIS 807·82 Cal. 84·22 P. 1136
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 16, 1889No. 12184California907 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fox, J.

This is an action for the recovery of the sum of ten thousand dollars damages for the alleged breach of a contract for the sale of land. The case was tried before the court without a jury, and the defendant had judgment. Plaintiff moved for a new trial, which was denied, and plaintiff appealed.

There are no findings in the record, nor does it affirmatively appear that findings were waived, but as no point is made on the want of findings, we pass to a consideration of the case on its merits, assuming that the facts found support the judgment.

Appellant makes two points, the first of which is not very clearly stated, but which practically amounts to this: That the evidence does not support the judgment, but on the contrary was such as would support a judgment in favor of plaintiff The other is, that the court erred in excluding and striking out certain evidence.

The contention of appellant is, that certain correspondence between the plaintiff and defendant, taken as a whole, was such as constituted an agreement in writing for the sale by defendant to plaintiff, and the purchase by plaintiff from defendant, of certain lands in Fresno County, at thirteen dollars per acre, one half…

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.