Eaton

Eaton v. Richeri

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 662·83 Cal. 185·23 P. 286
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 1890No. 13067California443 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hayne, J.

This was an action to recover for services rendered. The trial court gave judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appeals.

It is admitted by the pleadings that the defendant *186 agreed to pay plaintiff at the rate of three dollars a day, such payment to be made in provisions and supplies, “and for any balance that might be due plaintiff, plaintiff was to wait until the mining property aforesaid was sold, or until a sum sufficient to pay plaintiff said balance was realized from said mine.” If the contract stated in the findings is any different from the foregoing, it is to be disregarded, and the one admitted by the pleadings is to govern.

The plaintiff rendered services during a long period, and only a portion of the price was paid, leaving a balance of $1,490.05. After the services had ceased, a contract of sale was made of the mine for fifteen thousand dollars, which contract was signed by the defendant, and the sum of five thousand dollars was paid on account.

We think that the time of payment specified in the contractjrad arrived when the action was brought. The word “sold” does not necessarily, and in all connections, mean that a conveyance must be made, or that the…

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.