Vance v. Dingley

14 Cal. 53, 1859 Cal. LEXIS 237
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1859
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 14 Cal. 53 (Vance v. Dingley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Vance v. Dingley, 14 Cal. 53, 1859 Cal. LEXIS 237 (Cal. 1859).

Opinion

Baldwin, J.

delivered the opinion of the Court—Cope, J. concurring.

This case was brought to recover damages for the alleged violation of a contract to grind certain wheat, and deliver the flour on demand, upon the payment of the price agreed upon for grinding the wheat. The question turned upon the disputed fact, whether any tender was made of the price. The Court charged the jury, that a tender of the price was not necessary before the action could be maintained. No unconditional tender seems to have been made of the money. On the contrary, the agent of the plaintiff appears to have withdrawn the money, and the parties agreed to meet again, at a subsequent period, to arrange, or endeavor to arrange, the matter in dispute.

[54]*54On looking over the record, we are unable to see any error of law or fact upon which we could reverse the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Carter v. Sill
218 P. 81 (California Court of Appeal, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 Cal. 53, 1859 Cal. LEXIS 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vance-v-dingley-cal-1859.