| No search history |
Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Joseph H. Adler, Lewis Schiff, Solomon Adler and Lobe Rindskoff were the plaintiffs in error in this Supreme Court case against Aaron D. Fenton, Oliver H. Lee, William H. Davis and Merrit T. Cole as defendants in error. The dispute arose from a contract between the parties for the sale of certain real estate located near San Francisco Bay that was owned by Joseph and Solomon Adler at the time of their agreement with Fenton et al., who had agreed to purchase it for $20,000 payable over three years with interest on deferred payments at 10%. When payment became due on January 1st 1859 according to terms of the contract but was not made by Fenton et al., Joseph and Solomon sued them for breach of contract seeking specific performance or damages if they failed to comply with its terms; however when judgment went against them they appealed claiming that there were errors committed during trial proceedings which rendered an unjust verdict against them resulting in their loss of property rights without just compensation being paid out as required under law.. The Supreme Court ultimately found no reversible errors present during trial proceedings thus upholding lower court's decision denying relief sought by plaintiffs while affirming defendant’s right to possession based upon valid title obtained through execution of original sales agreement between all parties involved
In the dissenting opinion of this case, Justice Grier argued that the plaintiffs had not provided sufficient evidence to prove their claim. He noted that although they alleged a breach of contract between themselves and the defendants, no written agreement was presented as proof. Furthermore, he stated that even if an oral agreement did exist between them, it would be impossible for a court to determine its terms without any witnesses or other corroborating evidence. In conclusion, Justice Grier concluded that there was insufficient proof to support the plaintiff's claims and thus ruled in favor of the defendants.