History
  • No items yet
midpage
Whiting v. Heslep
4 Cal. 327
Cal.
1854
Check Treatment
*Mr. Justice Heydeneeldt

[330] delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.

1. It is not denied that some of the counts in the declaration were good. The demurrer being to the whole declaration, was therefore good.

2. A parol agreement, varying the terms of a contract under seal, is properly enforced under the indebitatus assumpsit, when the parol agreement has been executed. (2 Cal. 584.)

3. The form of the execution of the contract made it the personal contract of the defendants, upon which they alone were liable.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Whiting v. Heslep
Court Name: California Supreme Court
Date Published: Oct 15, 1854
Citation: 4 Cal. 327
Court Abbreviation: Cal.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.