Wilson

Wilson v. Moriarty

Good Law
1888 Cal. LEXIS 753·77 Cal. 596·20 P. 134
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 26, 1888No. 12828California1,237 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

This action was instituted for the purpose of having a certain contract of lease rescinded. The defendant demurred to the complaint filed, upon the grounds,—1. That it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; 2. That it was ambiguous, unintelligible, and uncertain in various particulars.

The demurrer was sustained, and the plaintiff declining to amend her complaint, judgment passed for the defendant, from which an appeal was taken.

The facts stated in the complaint are, as it appears to us, different from those set up in the case of Hawkins v. Hawkins, 50 Cal. 558 , the decision in which is relied on by the respondent here. In that case there was no allegation that the plaintiff was a person of weak mind, or that the consideration for the making of the contract was inadequate. It seems to have been a case where the party, deceived as to the terms of the contract he apparently assented to, was simply an unlettered and illiterate person, of ordinarily sound intellect, we must *598 suppose, who, by his own carelessness, had allowed himself to be entrapped, and where the defendant occupied no trust relation.

In the present case “an illiterate and ignorant…

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.