Klamath Lumber Co. v. Co-Operative Land & Trust Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPB'AL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Merced County and from an order refusing a new trial. B. N. Rector, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The action was to recover the sum of six hundred dollars for certain sweet potato crates alleged to have been sold and delivered to defendant. The main controversy is as to whether the crates were sold to defendant or to a certain Mr. Gutman, the evidence being sharply conflicting on this point. Closely related to the foregoing is another contention by appellant that if it ever made any promise to pay plaintiff for the crates it was a conditional one—that is, it would pay if Gutman did not, and, the proviso not being in writing, it was void by reason of subdivision 2 of section 1624 of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Buckley v. SilverbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by4 opinions
- Meyers v. McKillopCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
- Dunlap v. DeanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Hillman v. Garcia-RubyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Hillman v. Garcia-RubyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955