Loupe

Loupe v. Smith

Good Law
123 Cal. 491·1899 Cal. LEXIS 1104·56 P. 254
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 18, 1899S. F. No. 757California1,628 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Pringle, J.

Appeal from judgment. Action to quiet title brought by the respondent, a married woman. The appellant answers, and files a cross-complaint, setting up a contract in writing between the parties for the exchange of the land described in the complaint for lands of his own, with bonus of fifteen thousand dollars to be paid by him. The consideration is the mutual covenants of the parties. The contract is signed by both parties, the husband of the respondent signing her name as her attorney to the first contract, and the respondent affirming it by a supplemental agreement signed by herself. But the contract was never acknowledged by the respondent. The court below held for that reason that it was not her contract, and gave judgment in her favor. The case is an exceptional one, growing out of the transition state of the law in reference to married women, when the code was gradually throwing off the disabilities which were meant as a shield for her, but were often used by her as a sword.

The appellant by his cross-complaint claims specific performance of the contract and damages for its breach. But deferring *493 to the ruling of this court in the cases of Jackson v. Torrence, 83 Cal.…

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.