Jamison v. Simon
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Merced, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
— This action was brought to recover damages alleged to have resulted to the plaintiffs, by reason of the breach by the defendants of a contract for thé sale of a certain lot of wool. The contract was oral, and no part of the price was paid. Under such circumstances, the contract is by the statute declared to be invalid unless “the buyer accepts and receives part of the thing sold.” (Civ. Code, sec. 1739.) “There must be not only a delivery of the goods by the vendor,” said the Court of Appeals of New York (47 N. Y. 452), “but a receipt and acceptance of them by the vendee liable for the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Grant v. MilamSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Booth v. A. Levy & J. Zentner Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913
- Gard v. RamosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Tinkelpaugh-Kimmel Hardware Co. v. Minneapolis Threshing MacH. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908