Green & Middlesworth v. Prettyman
GREEN & MIDDLESWORTH v. PRETTYMAN
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Joseph G. Baldwin (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Baldwin
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Field, C. J. concurring.
The Court erred in giving the second instruction asked by the defendant. This instruction, taken in connection with the facts of the record, did not place the doctrine of equitable estoppel correctly before the jury. We have given the true rule in the case of Biddle Boggs v. Merced Mining Co., (14 Cal. 366) and in other cases; and a reference to those decisions will enable the Court on the next trial to instruct the jury, rightly upon this subject.
The other points do not seem to be well taken, but the statement is so imperfect that we do not think it advisable to pass definitely upon them.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
Cites, in this corpus
- Boggs v. Merced Mining Co. · 1859-07-01