Anderson

This is another of the Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands eases.

The first specification of error is based on an order overruling a demurrer to the complaint. The demurrer was a general one for want of sufficient facts, and we have already held that such a demurrer does not raise the defense of the statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proc. § 338, subd. 4) under the California practice. Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Tipper (C. C. A., No. 5701) 36 F.(2d) 941 , just decided.

The remaining specifications of error are based on instructions given by the court, or on the refusal of the court to instruct as requested. As is true in most of these eases, the exceptions to the instructions given are too general to present any question for review.

The court denied a request to direct a verdict in favor of the appellant, and this •ruling is assigned as error. In support of the Request it is contended that the appellee made no inquiry to discover the facts constituting the fraud. But this argument proceeds upon the erroneous theory that it was the duty of the appellee to immediately make inquiry as soon as the contract was entered into in order to ascertain whether or not she had been…