Hawn v. Seventy-Six Land and Water Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from an order refusing a new trial. On the trial, the court, in its first instruction to the jury, used the following language: “ The defendant relies upon a written release, which has been introduced in evidence by the plaintiff as a bar to this action. In ascertaining whether it is a bar or not, you will first ascertain from the evidence how and by whom it was signed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from an order refusing a new trial. On the trial, the court, in its first instruction to the jury, used the following language: “ The defendant relies upon a written release, which has been introduced in evidence by the plaintiff as a bar to this action. In ascertaining whether it is a bar or not, you will first ascertain from the evidence how and by whom it was signed. Although you may find that it was signed in the name of the firm or joint contractors by one of them, it will not follow, as a matter of coarse, that both are…
1Opinion of the Court
Hayne, C.
Action to recover for work and labor alleged to have been performed for defendant by plaintiff and one Chidester. . Defense, that plaintiff and Chidester were partners, and that Chidester, for valuable consideration, gave to the defendant a release of all demands of the firm. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. The release was not pleaded by defendant; but the complaint contains averments which, though somewhat vague, seem to point to the release; and the plaintiff himself proved the partnership, and introduced the release in evidence. Under these circumstances, he…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Cotten v. Perishable Air ConditionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Hill v. Maryland Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1915
- Scatena v. LawsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928