Rayfield

Rayfield v. Van Meter

Good Law
120 Cal. 416·1898 Cal. LEXIS 781·52 P. 666
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 25, 1898S. F. No. 762California1,435 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Britt, J.

On September 4, 1890, the parties to this action entered into a contract in writing whereby plaintiff covenanted to sell to defendant certain household- furniture at the price of eighteen hundred and thirty dollars, of which price the sum of one thousand dollars was then paid and the residue was to be paid on or before September 4, 1891, plaintiff to give a bill of sale of the furniture on receiving such deferred payment; defendant received immediate possession of the goods, but agreed on his part that if he failed to pay the said balance he would restore such possession to plaintiff on demand. In due time plaintiff tendered to defendant a bill of sale and demanded payment of the said balance of eight hundred and thirty dollars; he refused payment and refused to restore the goods. On ¡November 6, 1891, plaintiff brought this action to recover said goods, and obtained possession thereof by process of claim and delivery. In a cross-complaint defendant alleged that he entered into said contract under the influence of fraud and also duress practiced by plaintiff; that she had replevied the property, and that the consideration for his promise to pay said balance had failed; he prayed…

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.