gno.law

Welch v. Kenny

California Supreme Court · No. 4,177 · 1874-07-01 · Published · 49 Cal. 49

JAMES WELCH v. MICHAEL KENNY

Area
civil
Panel
E. W. McKinstry (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 — McKinstry

By the Court, McKinstry, J.:

The contract between the plaintiff and defendant, followed by the release of the Reddy Brothers, constituted a “novation;” and it was not, on the part of defendant, a mere promise to answer for the “debt, default or miscarriage of another,” nor required to be in writing by the Statute of Frauds. (Civil Code, 1530.)

Judgment and order denying new trial affirmed, with ten per cent, damages. Remittitur forthwith.

Mr. Justice Rhodes did not express an opinion.