Wilson v. Standard Engineering Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Wilson v. Standard Engineering Corp.

199 P.2d 363, 88 Cal. App. 2d 1007, 1948 Cal. App. LEXIS 1570

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 17, 1948

DocketCiv. No. 13771

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 199 P.2d 363 (Wilson v. Standard Engineering Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wilson v. Standard Engineering Corp., 199 P.2d 363, 88 Cal. App. 2d 1007, 1948 Cal. App. LEXIS 1570 (Cal. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

WARD, J.

In form the complaint herein follows the original allegations of Rutherford v. Standard Engineering Corp., ante, p. 554 [199 P.2d 354], with variations as to territory, dates and amounts. The same deletions made in the Rutherford case were not requested in the Wilson ease. Plaintiff Wilson permitted the complaint to stand with the single change of striking out the allegation that a bank had agreed to finance the erection of the houses “at . . . $7.50 per square foot.” This allegation was deleted. The same basic tort—misrepresentation—and the same breach of warranty are alleged. The evidentiary matter is similar and the instructions identical. Although defendants’ motion for a new trial was denied, the trial court found it necessary to reduce the $18,000 verdict by $2,700. The main prejudicial errors set forth in the Rutherford ease are applicable herein.

The judgment is reversed.

Peters, P. J., and Bray, J., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing was denied December 17, 1948, and respondent’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied January 13, 1949. Carter, J., and Traynor, J., voted for a hearing.

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

WARD, J.

In form the complaint herein follows the original allegations of Rutherford v. Standard Engineering Corp., ante, p. 554 [199 P.2d 354], with variations as to territory, dates and amounts. The same deletions made in the Rutherford case were not requested in the Wilson ease. Plaintiff Wilson permitted the complaint to stand with the single change of striking out the allegation that a bank had agreed to finance the erection of the houses “at . . . $7.50 per square foot.” This allegation was deleted. The same basic tort—misrepresentation—and the same breach of warranty are alleged. The evidentiary matter is similar and the instructions identical. Although defendants’ motion for a new trial was denied, the trial court found it necessary to reduce the $18,000 verdict by $2,700. The main prejudicial errors set forth in the Rutherford ease are applicable herein.

The judgment is reversed.

Peters, P. J., and Bray, J., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing was denied December 17, 1948, and respondent’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied January 13, 1949. Carter, J., and Traynor, J., voted for a hearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 P.2d 363, 88 Cal. App. 2d 1007, 1948 Cal. App. LEXIS 1570, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-standard-engineering-corp-calctapp-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack