Patten v. Hicks

Decided April 15, 1872

California Supreme Court · decided 1872-04-15

The complaint averred, that on the 10th' day of May, 1869, the plaintiff and defendants made an agreement, by which the plaintiff was to cut saw-logs on the defendants’ land and deliver at the defendants’ sawmill sufficient to keep the defendants’ mill running to its full capacity for the period of two years from the date of the contract, and that the defendants were to pay the plaintiff five dollars and fifty cents per thousand feet for all lumber timber so cut and…

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1872-04-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1923

8 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1By the Court,

Belcher, J.:

¶2The contract declared on was not to be performed within one year from the making thereof) and the parties having failed to reduce it to writing, or to make any note or memorandum thereof, it is within the Statute of Frauds and void.

¶3For the labor and services performed under this void contract the plaintiff can only recover on a quantum meruit. Ho such count being found in the complaint, the judgment must be reversed.

¶4When the case is again in the Court below the plaintiff may amend his complaint if he is so advised.

¶5Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

¶6Mr. Justice Crockett did not express an opinion.