Bushnell v. McCauley
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Keller Research Corp. v. Roquerre (United States District Court for the Southern District of California 1951)
- Edgerton v. Armour & Co. (United States District Court for the Southern District of California 1950)
- Burke v. Maguire (Cal. 1908)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court—Burnett, J., concurring.
The plaintiff employed the defendant, as an agent, to buy gold-dust, allowing him a certain per cent, on each one thousand dollars purchased.
The declaration alleges a deposit • of nine hundred and forty dollars for this purpose, and a refusal by the defendant, on demand, to account for, or pay over said money, or its equivalent in gold-dust.
The answer specifically denies a demand.
The defendant moved for a nonsuit, on the ground that no demand had been proved. The Court below overruled the motion-, at the same time instructing the jury that a demand need not be shown. This was error. “ In an action against an agent, for not accounting, etc., a request to account and pay over the balance must be stated.” 1 Chitty’s Pleading, § 331, and the cases there cited.
If necessary to be stated, it must be proven, as the allegata and probata must correspond.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.