Haase v. Cardoza
California Court of Appeal
331 P.2d 419, 165 Cal. App.2d 35 (1958)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Alice Cardoza’s deceased husband allegedly told Cardoza (defendant) before he died to leave $10,000 to the deceased’s sister, Rose Haase (Haase) (plaintiff), and $3000 to Loretta Haase (Loretta). Cardoza did not tell the Haases about this directive initially, but eventually admitted to Haase that her husband had given the instruction. At that point, Cardoza offered, and Haase accepted, $50 a month. These payments lasted for eight months, at which point Haase asked Cardoza for a note on the remaining balance of the alleged money owed. Haase had not made any changes in reliance on Cardoza’s informing her of Mr. Cardoza’s directive, or of Cardoza’s monthly payment offer. Haase brought suit to recover the balance. Loretta’s claim was assigned to Haase for purposes of the lawsuit. Cardoza filed a motion to dismiss, which the trial court granted. Haase appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Warne, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 778,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
