Duffy v. Hobson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of tbe Sixth. District, Sacramento County. Action to enforce performance of a written contract of sale of certain lots in tbe city of Sacrameuto, executed by tbe agent of tbe defendant, in tbe name of bis principal under a verbal authority to sell, and for damages for failure to perform tbe contract. Judgment was for plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of tbe Sixth. District, Sacramento County. Action to enforce performance of a written contract of sale of certain lots in tbe city of Sacrameuto, executed by tbe agent of tbe defendant, in tbe name of bis principal under a verbal authority to sell, and for damages for failure to perform tbe contract. Judgment was for plaintiff. Defendant moved for a new trial, which was denied; and from tbe judgment and the order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, this appeal is taken. Tbe other facts are stated in tbe opinion. Tbe Court erred in admitting in evidence…
1Opinion of the Court
Wallace, J.,
delivered tbe opinion of tbe Court, Crockett, J., Temple, J., and Sprague, J., concurring:-
*243On the trial in tbe District Court, tbe plaintiff offered in evidence a written contract, by tbe terms of wbicb be claimed tbat tbe defendant bad sold and agreed to convey to bim certain lots in tbe city of Sacramento. Tbis contract was not stamped with United States revenue stamps, denoting tbe payment of tax to tbe Federal Government; and upon tbat ground tbe defendant objected to its introduction as evidence, and bas renewed tbe objection bere. "We think tbe objection not well taken. Tbe…
2Cited by66 opinions
- Gunn v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Carstens v. McReavyWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Halsey v. MorteiroSupreme Court of Virginia · 1896
- McFarland v. LillardIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891
- Armstrong v. LoweCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.