Hurlburd v. Bogardus
Before: Terry
Synopsis
K. and S. were the owners of a mule team, which they used in hauling quartz-rock to their quartz-mill—the team was driven by one L., an employee. K. and S. sold the team to H., executing a bill of sale, and delivering the team by the discharge of L., the driver, who was immediately employed by H., and saying to H. “there is the team.” K. and S. then hired of H. the team at $8 per day, and put it in the same business of hauling quartz-rock as before, and with L., the same driver. Team was kepi and fed at K. and S/s stable, as before the sale : Held, that there was no such actual and continued change in the possession of the property, under H/s purchase, as to take the case out of the operation of the Statute of Frauds.
Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court Baldwin, J., concurring.
In this case, there was no such actual and continued change in the possession of the property, under plaintiffs’ purchase, as to take the case out of the operation of the Statute of Frauds. It remained in charge of the same person, at the same place, and was used in the same manner after as before such purchase.
Judgment affirmed.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)