Poetker v. Dyck

California Court of Appeal Jun 14, 1927 No. Docket No. 4571.Published

Before: Murphey

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that no enforceable contract existed between the parties due to a lack of meeting of the minds and failure to describe the property, thereby entitling the plaintiff to the return of his $1,000 payment.

Issues

Whether a valid and enforceable contract for the sale of land was formed between the parties.
Whether the trial court erred in admitting parol evidence regarding the disposition of the $1,000 payment.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is manifest from the foregoing that there never was and never has been any meeting of the minds or any contract between these parties.”

“Nowhere does there appear any description of the lands to be conveyed.”

“In his brief the defendant admits that the writings are undoubtedly incomplete, in which conclusion we readily concur.”

MURPHEY, J.,

pro

tem.

This is an action to recover the sum of $1,000 paid by the plaintiff to defendant during the pendency of negotiations for the purchase and sale of a tract of land in Fresno County. Judgment went for plaintiff in the trial court and defendant appeals. The record discloses that the title to the tract of land involved in this litigation was vested in one Beshaw, subject to a mortgage of $7,000; that there was an agreement by Beshaw to convey to one Wickstrom, who in turn had agreed to convey to the defendant; a crop contract with the California Raisin Association and a renewal option, which together covered a period of six years. The plaintiff, after having been shown the property by a real estate agent, went to the defendant and as a result of their negotiations the following writings were signed:

“Shafter, California, Nov. 12, 20.

“First National Bank, Reedly, Cal.

“Gentlemen:-—Enclosed please find two insurance policies and some temporary escrow instructions by which you may be guided when Mr. Poetker calls at your bank.

[773]

“Thanking you in advance for the courtesy,

“I remain,

“Yours very truly,

“P. B. Dyck.”

“Shafter, Nov. 12, 1920.

“Escrow Instructions.

“If J, D. Poetker can assume the balance of my equity of $4,000.00, I will allow accrued interest from Dee. 1st, 1919 to Nov. 12, 1920, which is $1064.02, leaving $2935.08, amount due me in addition to $6000.00, first payment. In this event, Mr. Poetker will assume the contract I made with Radish and Miljarak.

“P. R. Dyck.

“J. D. Poetker.”

“Escrow Instructions.

“Purchase Price $26000.00—Cash to be paid $6000.00— Accept receipt held by J. D. Poetker for $1000.00 as part of said $6000.00 cash payment. Date of contract November 12th, 1920. Terms: $3000.00 including Interest to be paid Nov. 12, 1921, and Nov. 12th, 1922. After that $3500.00 per year. Seller pays 1st half of 1920-21 taxes. Prorate insurance. Pay Hagan & Anderson $1000.00 commission. Seller pays water tax for 1920. Two horses, harness, harrow, cultivator, 2 plows and 50 sweet boxes and hay in the barn go with the place. Write new contract showing that J. D. Poetker assumes contract dated Dec. 1-1919 between P. B. Dyck and Radish & Miljarak and that he will make payments direct to said Radish & Miljarak beginning 1921. Payments to be $2500.00 to Radish & Miljarak; $500.00 to P. R. Dyck, $1000.00 from 1923.

Poetker v. Dyck

AI Brief

MURPHEY, J.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief