MEDBERRY v. OLCOVICH (1936)

Supreme Court of California.

MEDBERRY et al. v. OLCOVICH et al.

Civ. 10408.

Decided: September 04, 1936

C. H. Hartke and Freeman R. Brant, both of Los Angeles, for appellants. George Appell, of Los Angeles, for respondents.

The petition for a hearing in this court is denied on the ground that the judgment of the District Court of Appeal is proper, even though it may be assumed to be based upon the conclusion, among others, that the agreement was sufficiently supported by a moral obligation. The plaintiffs suffered prejudice by reason of the expenses incurred by them on the promise of the defendant Emil Olcovich. Under such circumstances, a sufficient legal consideration for the promise was present. Sections 1605, 1606, Civil Code.

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Out of date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