Clark v. Clark
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Seventh Judicial District, County of Sonoma. The defendant, Patrick Clark, had occupied one hundred and sixty acres of land in Sonoma County, from October, 1871 to October, 1872, as the tenant of the plaintiff. Patrick Clark desired to lease the land for another year, and had several conversations with the plaintiff on the subject.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Seventh Judicial District, County of Sonoma. The defendant, Patrick Clark, had occupied one hundred and sixty acres of land in Sonoma County, from October, 1871 to October, 1872, as the tenant of the plaintiff. Patrick Clark desired to lease the land for another year, and had several conversations with the plaintiff on the subject. On the 8th day of November, 1872, Patrick Clark and defendant Dake called on the plaintiff, and it was then agreed verbally that the plaintiff should lease the land to Patrick for one year, with the privilege of two years more, at an…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Wallace, C. J.:
1. The terms of the agreement for a lease were sufficiently certain in themselves to support a decree for specific performance.
2. The plaintiff had received $600 for which he had delivered to the defendant a receipt: “Six hundred dollars on account of lease to be drawn by F. W. Shattuck, according to our agreement stated before him.”
3. The entry of the defendant, Clark, upon the premises, and their occupancy by him for the first year by his agent, Dake, is equivalent to his personal occupation. There was no promise on his part that he would personally occupy; and…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Paul v. Layne & Bowler Corp.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Cochrane v. Justice Mining Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1891
- Byers v. DohenyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Pierce v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Losey v. HutchinsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.