Foulke v. San Diego & Gila Southern Pacific Railroad
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Eighteenth Judicial District, County of San Diego. On the 17th of September, 1872, the defendant, by its president, employed Isaac Hartman, an attorney at law, to conduct legal proceedings in the courts for the condemnation of certain lands in the city of San Diego, for the use of the defendant, and agreed to pay him therefor the sum of one thousand dollars.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Eighteenth Judicial District, County of San Diego. On the 17th of September, 1872, the defendant, by its president, employed Isaac Hartman, an attorney at law, to conduct legal proceedings in the courts for the condemnation of certain lands in the city of San Diego, for the use of the defendant, and agreed to pay him therefor the sum of one thousand dollars. Hartman entered upon the performance of the services and continued in the same until directed by the defendant to discontinue the proceedings. During ■, the rendition of the services the defendant had…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, McKinstry, J.:
Section 10 of the act of 1861, concerning railroad corporations, provides: “No contract shall be binding upon the company unless'made in writing.”
In Pixley v. W. P. R. R. Co. (33 Cal. 198), it was held that the clause above quoted referred to executory and not to executed contracts, and that when a corporation takes and holds the benefit derived from the performance of a contract not in writing, it is liable to the extent of the benefit received.
There are indeed dicta in the opinions delivered in Pixley v. Western Pacific Railroad Company, to the apparent effect…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pixley v. The Western Pac. R.R.California Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by9 opinions
- Gribble v. Columbus Brewing Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Manchester & Lawrence Railroad v. Concord RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1889
- Main v. CasserlyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Pacific Mill Co. v. InmanOregon Supreme Court · 1907
- Storz & Iler v. FinklesteinNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.