Hoen v. Simmons
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the court of First Instance of the district of San Francisco. The action was brought to recover possession of a lot of land in the city of San Francisco. The plaintiff had made a verbal contract with the defendants to sell to them the premises in controversy for the sum of $.5000, of which $1000 was to be paid down, and the balance in two months, with interest at the rate of two per cent, a month.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the court of First Instance of the district of San Francisco. The action was brought to recover possession of a lot of land in the city of San Francisco. The plaintiff had made a verbal contract with the defendants to sell to them the premises in controversy for the sum of $.5000, of which $1000 was to be paid down, and the balance in two months, with interest at the rate of two per cent, a month. It was understood by the parties that the contract was to be reduced to writing, and signed by them; papers were accordingly drawn up by the defendants’ attorney, but before they were…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Bennett, J.
Action by plaintiff to recover possession, and cross suit by defendants for specific performance.
It is clear that the plaintiff is entitled to recover possession of the lot in question, unless the defendants have a right to compel him to convey it to them. The counsel for the defendants made a point, that, inasmuch as the plaintiff had proved no title in himself, the defendants, being in possession, could not be ousted. This is very good law when applied to a proper state of facts, but lias no application in this case. The defendants, having entered into possession,…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Hicks v. LovellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Noe v. CardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Hoexter v. JudsonWashington Supreme Court · 1899
- Kasey v. Molybdenum Corp. of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Flint v. ConnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.