Dennison

Dennison v. Chapman

Good Law
105 Cal. 447·1895 Cal. LEXIS 678·39 P. 61
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 5, 1895No. 15525California2,996 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Searls, J.

This is an action by W. E. Dennison, the respondent, against E. W. Chapman, the appellant, upon an alleged breach of a contract by which the defendant agreed to purchase a mine for the joint benefit of plaintiff and defendant.

Plaintiff had a verdict and judgment for thirteen hundred and twelve dollars and fifty cents and costs. The appeal is from the final judgment and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.

On the second day of September, 1889, plaintiff and defendant entered into a written contract, by the terms of which defendant agreed (provided the purchase could be made at a price satisfactory to the parties respectively) to purchase, within thirty days from the date of *451 the agreement, the Bumfeldt Hydraulic Mine, situate in the county of Trinity, California.

Upon such purchase being made the plaintiff was to be placed in charge as superintendent for a term of one year at a monthly salary of one hundred and fifty dollars.

Defendant was for the period of one year to reserve and carry for the plaintiff a one-fourth interest in the mine, and at or before the expiration of the year to give plaintiff a clear title to such one-fourth interest at cost…

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.