Barber v. Burrows
California Supreme Court
Barber v. Burrows, 51 Cal. 404 (Cal. 1876)
1876 Cal. LEXIS 61
Barber v. Burrows
Opinion of the Court
The instrument of September 2, 1872, was never completely executed. It is evident upon an inspection of the writing itself that it was intended to be signed by all the parties to the contract upon which it was indorsed. These parties were the two principals in the contract and the two sureties upon the bond attached to and forming a part of the contract. It was signed by but three of these persons.
As the contract for the extension of time was not complete, it was not obligatory.
Judgment and order denying a now trial affirmed. Remittitur forthwith.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- M. BARBER v. JONATHAN BURROWS, JOSEPH BAUQUIER and WILLIAM GWYNN
- Cited By
- 15 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Execution of Whitten Contract.— If a written agreement which is in. tended to be signed by several persons as parties thereto is not signed by all, it is not completely executed and does not bind any of the parties. Release of Sueeties.—If a written contract for the extension of time within which to complete a building is intended to be signed by the owner, the contractor, and the persons who became sureties for the contractor for the fulfillment of his agreement, and is signed only by the owner, contractor, and one of the sureties, it is not obligatory, and does not release the sureties from liability for damages resulting from the failure of the contractor to fulfill his agreement. Construction of Contract.—If an agreement indoresd on the back of a contract states that it is made between the parties to the contract, it shows upon its face that it was intended to be signed by all the parties to the contract.