Legal Opinion

Martin v. Morgan

California Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1890No. 13783PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.

This is an action to compel specific performance of a unilateral contract, by which the respondent agreed to convey to appellant’s assignors a certain tract of land at any time -within sixty days from the date of said contract, upon the following express conditions: The said assignors to pay to respondent $150 of the purchase-money down on the delivery of said contract, and the balance within sixty days from the date thereof, otherwise said agreement to be null and void. One hundred and fifty dollars was paid on the delivery of the contract, but the balance of the purchase price, to wit,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Benedict v. LynchNew York Court of Chancery · 1815
  2. Grey v. TubbsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Glock v. Howard & Wilson Colony Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Barkis v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Barkis v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Maffet v. Oregon & Cal. RailroadOregon Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Lum v. StevensHawaii Supreme Court · 1958

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API