Riddell v. Blake
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Seventh Judicial District. This was an action brought by the plaintiff Riddell, against the defendants, Blake, to recover $2,425, being the principal and interest of a promissory note given by them on the purchase of a tract of land from the plaintiff, situated in the County of Solano, made January 28th, 1853, and payable September 20th, 1853. In answer to the complaint, defendants alleged that simultaneously with the execution of the promissory note, the…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Seventh Judicial District. This was an action brought by the plaintiff Riddell, against the defendants, Blake, to recover $2,425, being the principal and interest of a promissory note given by them on the purchase of a tract of land from the plaintiff, situated in the County of Solano, made January 28th, 1853, and payable September 20th, 1853. In answer to the complaint, defendants alleged that simultaneously with the execution of the promissory note, the plaintiff executed and delivered to them a bond stipulating and agreeing, in consideration thereof, ánd the payment of said…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Heydeneeldt
Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.
From an examination of the record, it appears that if the defendants had paid the purchase money they would have received a deed to the land, as stipulated for, in the plain*268tiff’s bond for title. The only object, therefore, of the defense set up, must have been, to rescind the contract, upon the ground that the plaintiff could not perform, because he had no title to the land.
For this purpose, the averments in the answer are insufficient. It was necessary to show an outstanding paramount title in another.
So we decided in Thayer v. White, 3 Cal. 228, and in Smith v.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thayer v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853