Grindley

Grindley v. Santa Cruz County

Good Law
1884 Cal. LEXIS 788·2 Cal. Unrep. 326·4 P. 390
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 18, 1884No. 8170California804 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thornton, J.

Action by a physician to recover damages for breach of contract made with him by the supervisors of Santa Cruz county.

The court rendered the following decision:

CONCLUSIONS OP LAW.

“That the interests of the indigent sick of said county in said hospital demanded the removal of said plaintiff from the position of physician of said hospital, and that the board of supervisors of said county, in the removal of said plaintiff from said position, was in the exercise of a lawful authority of said board, exercised in a lawful manner. Let judgment be entered for defendant for its costs in this action.”

The contract of plaintiff and defendant was a valid contract. If plaintiff performed the duties required of him by the contract, and incumbent upon him as physician of the hos.pital, the defendant had no right to discharge him during the period embraced in it. The findings in relation to the plaintiff’s performance are not clear. It is not distinctly found that he did not perform such duties. The sixth finding states that he did perform them. The finding (ninth) that he did not go into the wards of the hospital, seek the patients there confined, who were unable to go to the office,…

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.