Magee v. Kast
Before: Crockett
Synopsis
Complaint fob Goods Sold.—In a complaint for goods sold and delivered, the ordinary form of a Court in indebitatus assumpsit is sufficient.
Conditional Signatube to Ageeement.—If a composition agreement is drawn up by which the creditors of a person agree to release their several demands on the payment of thirty per cent, of the same by the debtor, and one of the creditors who signs annexes to his signature a condition, this condition becomes a part of the contract of such creditor, and, on delivery of the agreement, becomes obligatory as such.
Idem.—Such condition annexed to the signature becomes obligatory on the debtor, and he must fulfill the same in order to be released by the creditor who thus signed, and the Courts have no power to excuse him from performance.
Composition Agbeehent of Cbeditob with Debtob. —If a creditor agrees with his debtor that, on being indemnified against his suretyship on a bond signed by him for the debtor, he will accept thirty cents on the dollar in satisfaction of his demand, provided the other creditors will do so; he, nevertheless, has a right, on signing the composition agreement, to make it a condition that all the other creditors shall accede to the same terms within a specified time.
By the Court, Crockett, J.: 1. The demurrer to the complaint was properly overruled. (Abadie v. Carrillo, 32 Cal. 172.)
2. The condition annexed to the signature of the plaintiffs to the composition agreement was a part of the contract on their part, and, on its delivery, became obligatory as such.
3. On the question, first, whether it was the mutual understanding of the parties, that the composition was to be [146]confined to the California creditors, or was to include also the Philadelphia creditors, and, second, whether the plaintiffs subsequently waived the performance of the conditions annexed to their signatures, there was a substantial conflict in the evidence, and we cannot disturb the decision and judgment on the ground that in this respect they were not justified by the evidence.
4. The conditions annexed to the signature of the plaintiffs, being a part of the contract, were obligatory on the defendant, and the Court has no power to excuse him from their performance.
5. If it be assumed that the plaintiffs agreed with the defendant that on being indemnified against their suretyship on the bond they would accept thirty cents on the dollar in satisfaction of their demand, provided the other creditors would do so; they, nevertheless, had the right, on signing the composition agreement, to make it a condition that all the other creditors should accede to the same terms within a specified time.
We see no error in the record.
Judgment and order affirmed. Remittitur forthwith.
Mr. Justice Rhodes did not express an opinion.
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)