SWEELEY v. GORDON ET AL (1941)

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.

SWEELEY v. GORDON ET AL.

Civ. 13162.

Decided: November 12, 1941

W. W. Comstock, of Los Angeles, for appellant. Gerard Remington, of Los Angeles, for respondent.

Appellant's petition for a rehearing is denied. In the brief filed by respondent before the rendition of our decision it is stated that “the complaint alleges a conspiracy between the seller and the buyer * * *”. Respondent based his argument on the allegations of a conspiracy contained in the original complaint. Appellant did not file any reply brief, but he now calls our attention to the fact that an amended complaint was filed in which his cause of action was based upon allegations that Neubeiser wrongfully induced Gordon to violate his contract with plaintiff and to assert the invalidity of the contract because of the failure to comply with the statute of frauds. Gordon had the legal right to stand upon the statute of frauds and Neubeiser did not become liable in damages to plaintiff if he did in fact induce Gordon to stand upon his legal rights.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network