Bartlett

Bartlett v. McGee

Good Law
1896 Cal. LEXIS 1067·5 Cal. Unrep. 417·45 P. 1029
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 20, 1896S. F. No. 97California1,843 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vanclief, J.

On August 26, 1887, the defendant agreed to sell to A. Bartlett (brother of plaintiff) a certain lot of land situate in Berkeley, Alameda county. At the date of the agreement, A. Bartlett deposited with defendant $950 as a partial payment of the purchase money, on the express condition that it should be returned to him in case defendant’s title should prove invalid. The agreement and deposit were evidenced by the following written memorandum, signed by the defendant:

On April 3, 1888, A. Bartlett assigned the agreement, with all his rights thereunder, to plaintiff, who, on April 23, 1888, commenced this action to'recover the deposit of $950, on the alleged ground that defendant had failed and refused to make or tender conveyance of a valid title. The judgment was in favor of the plaintiff for the sum demanded; and defendant has appealed from the judgment, and also from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

It is alleged in the complaint that the defects in defendant’s title were (1) that the land described in the agreement was subject to a recorded mortgage; and (2) that it was subject to an agreement in writing by and between defendant and one George Bates, executed…

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.