Flynn v. Dougherty
California Supreme Court
' Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.
The only question involved in this appeal is, whether the contract of the plaintiff, “to cut, furnish, and deliver" to defendant “ the stone-work of the asylum to be built at Agnew Station, according to the plans and specifications of Mr. Jacob Leuzen and Son, architects," is within the statute of frauds. (Civ. Code, sec. 1739.) There is no doubt that it is within the provisions of the statute, unless excepted therefrom by section 1740 of the Civil Code, which is as follows: “An agreement to manufacture a thing, from materials furnished by the manufacturer or by another person, is not within…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Lawless v. CalawayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Mitchell Camera Corp. v. Fox Film Corp.California Supreme Court · 1937
- United States v. San Francisco Electrical Contractors Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1944
- Ferguson v. IngleOregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Idaho Mercantile Co. v. KalanquinIdaho Supreme Court · 1900
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.