California Court of Appeal
97 P. 163 (1908)
On February 25, 1905, Robt. Marsh & Co. (Marsh) (plaintiff) agreed to pay M.A. Lott (defendant) 25 cents for the option to purchase land owned by Lott for $100,000 with a $30,000 payment due within four years. The contract gave Marsh the option to purchase the land up until June 1, 1905, with the possibility of a 30-day extension. On June 1, 1905, Marsh notified Lott that he elected to extend the option for 30 days. On June 2, 1905, Lott revoked the option. On June 29, 1905, Marsh paid Lott $30,000 pursuant to the February 25 agreement. Marsh later brought suit for specific performance of the contract. The trial court found that the 25 cents paid for the option was inadequate and found in favor of Lott.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Shaw, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 241,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 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.