Dengler v. Michelssen
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the> city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This is an action to recover money averred to be due on a certain lease. Judgment went for defendants in the court below, and plaintiffs appealed.
The facts found by the court are substantially these: About August 31, 1878, plaintiffs leased (by written indenture) to one E. B. Burdick, a certain piece of land *126and premises in San Francisco known as lot 31 in block 58, for the term of one year from September 1, 1878. Burdick was to pay as rent $110 per month, payable every six months in advance. Defendants furnished to Burdick $660, with which Burdick at the time of the execution of the lease…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Johnson v. ShermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Skaggs v. EmersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Camarillo v. FenlonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
3Cited by4 opinions
- Automobile, Truck, Tractor & Implement Co. v. SalladayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Rispin v. Midnight Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1923
- Brandt v. PhillippiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- California Crushed Fruit Corp. v. International Provision Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932