Myers v. Mitchell

FOURT, J. This is an appeal from judgments in favor of the respondents Myers awarding damages against appellants for breach of a written contract. The matters were heard before the trial court without a jury.

A résumé of the facts is as follows: In November of 1952, respondents Myers looked at a portion of appellants’, Mitch-ells’, ranch property in the Santa Ynez Valley. They were taken into the property over the South River Road, which leads easterly along the south bank of the Santa Ynez River from the County Road, known as Refugio Road. A Mr. Biel, of the firm of Rowan and Company of Los Angeles, acting as Mitchells’ agent, took the Myers in.

Subsequently, a contract was signed between the parties, dated January 26, 1953, which provided for the sale of approximately 800 acres of the Juan y Lolita ranch to the Myers.

The total purchase price was to be computed on the basis of the various types of land sold and the acreage of each. According to the contract, there were four classifications of land. Myers was to pay $400 per acre for land irrigable by gravity flow from existing concrete systems; $200 per acre for hay land; $100 per acre for range land; and the flat sum of $10,000 for river pasture land.

The contract of sale also provided for supplementary contracts, one for the maintenance of the roads and another for a certification of survey, from which the purchase price was to be computed. There were also provisions dealing with the building and maintenance of roads, easements and other matters.

The contract of sale was drawn by the appellants as was the contract for maintenance of roads. The Certification of Survey was drawn by the respondents.

Mr. Laurabee, of the firm of Laurabee and Waite, Surveyors, was engaged by appellants to make the required survey. The survey disclosed that there was a total of 174.27 acres of irrigable land; 196.30 acres of hay land; 294.75 acres of range land; and 213.15 acres of river wash land.

Because of the rocky nature of some of the irrigable land lying north of the river, it was agreed that a percentage of this irrigable land was to be downgraded to hay land according to a ratio established by the survey.

The “Certification of Juan y Lolita Ranch Survey” upon which the trial court relied, after the ratio was applied, stated in part as follows:

[618]