Moulton v. Harris

Citations

• 94 Cal. 420
• 29 P. 706
• 1892 Cal. LEXIS 701

Syllabus

<p>Vendor and Purchaser — Statute of Frauds—Verbal Contract of Sale —Part Performance. — The taking of actual possession of the land by a vendee, with the consent of the vendor, and making valuable improvements thereon on faith of the contract, is a sufficient part performance of a verbal contract for the sale of the land to take it out of the operation of the statute of frauds.</p> <p>Id. — Exchange of Land — Specific Performance — Evidence — Assailing Title Admitted by Pleadings. —In an action to enforce the specific performance of a contract for the conveyance of land, where the plaintiff alleged that by the terms of the contract she traded her land for a band of horses and a tract of land of the defendant, and the answer of the defendant admitted plaintiff’s ownership of her land, and only raised an issue as to whether the defendant, at the time the contract was entered into, agreed to give his own land as part consideration for the plaintiff’s land, evidence on the part of the defendant tending to show that the land of the plaintiff is not hers in fact or in equity, as against her father’s creditors, is irrelevant and immaterial, and is properly excluded.</p> <p>Id.—Note Securing Litigated Title — Waiver of Objection—Evidence ■—Payment to Assignee of Joint Payee.—Where a note was given by the defendant for the price of the land which plaintiff claimed the defendant agreed to transfer in part exchange for plaintiff’s land, and plaintiff claimed that the note was given because the title to defendant’s land was in litigation, and was not to be paid if a good title could be made to the property, and plaintiff waived objection to the title and asked for a conveyance of the land, and defendant contended that he never agreed to sell or transfer his land, but that the note represented a part of the purchase price which he was to pay for the plaintiff’s land, the exclusion of evidence offered to show a payment of the note is not prejudicial error, where the proof shows