Renwick v. Garland
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from s judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino Conintf. Prank P. Oster, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Appeal on judgment-roll, with bill of exceptions, from a judgment for the plaintiffs. The suit was brought to recover the balance due on contract made by the plaintiffs with the defendant, as executrix, by which plaintiffs agreed that they “would drill a well for defendant on the property of said estate in said county,” etc.
The answer alleges the terms of the contract more specifically, and perhaps differently. But the court found that the contract was as alleged in the complaint, and that the same was fully performed according to its terms; and, as conclusions of law, that plaintiffs were…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Austin v. . MunroNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Van Cott v. . PrenticeNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Eustace v. JahnsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Sterrett v. BarkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Melone v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by7 opinions
- Harm v. FrasherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Merced Bank v. PriceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Southern Pacific Co. v. SwansonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Dugand v. MagnusCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Berg v. BergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.