Rio Linda Poultry Farms v. Fredericksen

[434]

PRESTON, P. J.

The action was brought upon an account stated.

Defendant denied specifically the allegations of the complaint and in addition to his denials set up other grounds of defense, not necessary to detail.

The court below found that the allegations of the complaint to the effect that defendants were indebted upon an account stated were untrue and expressly declined to make any further findings of fact.

It was apparently the view of the trial court that the instrument relied upon by plaintiff was not a stated account and gave judgment accordingly.

The plaintiff sues as the assignee of Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Company and no issue is raised as to the question of the assignment, its execution or validity. Appellant relies upon a certain writing in the form of a letter addressed to defendants, and upon the written acceptance by the latter of the terms of the letter. This letter is dated February 3, 1927, and addressed to defendant and is, substantially, as follows:

This letter is written to confirm a verbal understanding of even date in reference to obligations of defendants under a certain deed of trust and a contract for deed.

Then follows a

resume

of prior dealings and a recital of defendants’ default, and a certain compromise theretofore effected. It then recites that there is remaining only a second deed of trust in an original amount of $1200 upon which payments have not been kept up and also refers to an advancement of some $196 upon which $100 has been paid. Then it is stated that to harmonize all past due items the former compromise has been effected and that by such agreement it was agreed that there should be added to the deed of trust all interest accruing to November 1, 1926, and also the balance of cash which was owing; also any taxes paid on behalf of defendants.

The letter then contained this clause: “A statement will be rendered to you within the next thirty days showing the total amount of your indebtedness, figuring everything to November 1, 1926.” The letter further recites that the agreement between the parties is that $250 will be advanced to defendants and will be charged to second deed of trust