Babcock v. Briggs
Opinion
Injured party may waive tort, and sue in assumpsit. (Fratt v. Clark, 12 Cal. 90; Roberts v. Fvans, 43 Cal. 382; Tuite v. Wakelee, 19 Cal. 692; Caussidiere v. Beers, 2 Keyes, 198; Civil Code, sec. 1621.)
Cope & Boyd, for Respondents.
The action is not upon a contract within the meaning of the statute. (Code of Civil Procedure, secs. 537, 538.) The gravamen of the action is a tort—a wrongful conversion of the property and money of the plaintiffs. There is no allegation of any promise or undertaking on the part of the defendants, and the idea of a contract is expressly negatived by the averments of the complaint.
The facts stated in the complaint do not make a case which would support a writ of attachment under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Order affirmed. Remittitur forthwith.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
52 Cal. 502 (Babcock v. Briggs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.