Nelson v. Angel

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtCharles A. Christin, Thomas J. Keegan, Earl J. Carroll; GOODELL; DOOLING, J. and RUNNELLS
Citation210 P.2d 256,94 Cal.App.2d 136
PartiesNELSON v. ANGEL et al. Civ. 13986.
Decision Date14 October 1949

Page 256

210 P.2d 256
94 Cal.App.2d 136
NELSON

v.
ANGEL et al.
Civ. 13986.
District Court of Appeal, First District, Division 2, California.
Oct. 14, 1949.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 12, 1949.
Hearing Denied Dec. 13, 1949.

[94 Cal.App.2d 137] Charles A. Christin, Thomas J. Keegan, Earl J. Carroll, J. W. Radil, O. A. Hunt, San Francisco, for appellant.

Philander Brooks Beadle, San Francisco, for respondents.

GOODELL, Acting Presiding Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment in defendants' favor after their demurrer to the amended complaint had been sustained without leave to amend.

The action was brought by the lessor against his two lessees of premises on Mason street, in San Francisco, to be occupied as a night club. The lease was dated

Page 257

April 30, 1947, to run for a term of ten years commencing on August 1, 1947.

The lease (which consists of some 33 articles) provides that it may be assigned to a California corporation organized by lessees. Such corporation, named Hellenic Enterprises, Inc., was so organized, an assignment to it was made on July 1, 1947, and the corporation on that day accepted and assumed the lease and agreed to perform and be bound by all its terms and conditions. Hellenic Enterprises, Inc., is not sued.

Attached to the lease is an inventory of the equipment, furniture and other personal property located on the premises and owned by lessees, 'subject to certain encumbrances'.

By paragraph 4 lessees agreed to execute to lessor and record, not later than July 31, 1947, a chattel mortgage which would be a first lien (1) on all the inventoried property, free and clear of all encumbrances, and (2) on all equipment, furniture and personal property thereafter placed in the premises, which would be a first lien thereon subject to any conditional sale contracts covering such new property (with certain limitations respecting the amount or value thereof), to secure the faithful performance of the lease including the rent. Paragraph 4 provided, further, that whenever any personal property was placed by lessees on the property subject to conditional sales contracts, exact copies of such contracts would be immediately furnished to lessor, who would have the right to pay off such contracts, and to have them assigned to him by the conditional vendors.

Paragraph 5 contains the provisions mentioned above respecting assignment to a corporation. Those provisions, however, contain the proviso that such assignment may be made...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Hohn, Application of
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • August 21, 1964
    ...126 Cal.App. 2d Supp. 845, 846-847, 272 P.2d 571; Perry v. First Corporation, 167 Cal.App.2d 359, 368, 334 P.2d 299; Nelson v. Angel, 94 Cal.App.2d 136, 139, 210 P.2d 256, the notice of appeal--'from that Order confirming award of Arbitrators'--filed between the date of order confirming awa......
  • Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Bd.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 22, 1959
    ...decided. Cf. In re Estate of Damke, 133 Cal. 433, 434, 65 P. 888; Adams v. Talbott, 20 Cal.2d 415, 417, 126 P.2d 347; Nelson v. Angel, 94 Cal.App.2d 136, 139, 210 P.2d 256; Crane v. Livingston, 98 Cal.App.2d 699, 702, 220 P.2d 744; Karrell v. Watson, 116 Cal.App.2d 769, 772, 254 P.2d 651, 2......
  • Nelson v. Angel
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 30, 1954
    ...after assignment of the lease to Hellenic Enterprises, Inc., the original lessees were no longer liable thereunder. It is reported in 94 Cal.App.2d 136, 210 P.2d 256. Therein the judgment of the trial court was reversed and it was held that according to the allegations in the complaint ther......
  • Deschamps v. Independent Cab Co., No. 14108
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 12, 1949
    ...is invalid upon another ground. No affidavits had been filed as required by law, and yet the court purported to grant the new trial upon[94 Cal.App.2d 136] 'all other legal grounds' in addition to the ground of insufficiency of the evidence. This the court had no right to do. Hence its acti......
4 cases
  • Hohn, Application of
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • August 21, 1964
    ...126 Cal.App. 2d Supp. 845, 846-847, 272 P.2d 571; Perry v. First Corporation, 167 Cal.App.2d 359, 368, 334 P.2d 299; Nelson v. Angel, 94 Cal.App.2d 136, 139, 210 P.2d 256, the notice of appeal--'from that Order confirming award of Arbitrators'--filed between the date of order confirming awa......
  • Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Bd.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 22, 1959
    ...decided. Cf. In re Estate of Damke, 133 Cal. 433, 434, 65 P. 888; Adams v. Talbott, 20 Cal.2d 415, 417, 126 P.2d 347; Nelson v. Angel, 94 Cal.App.2d 136, 139, 210 P.2d 256; Crane v. Livingston, 98 Cal.App.2d 699, 702, 220 P.2d 744; Karrell v. Watson, 116 Cal.App.2d 769, 772, 254 P.2d 651, 2......
  • Nelson v. Angel
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 30, 1954
    ...after assignment of the lease to Hellenic Enterprises, Inc., the original lessees were no longer liable thereunder. It is reported in 94 Cal.App.2d 136, 210 P.2d 256. Therein the judgment of the trial court was reversed and it was held that according to the allegations in the complaint ther......
  • Deschamps v. Independent Cab Co., No. 14108
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 12, 1949
    ...is invalid upon another ground. No affidavits had been filed as required by law, and yet the court purported to grant the new trial upon[94 Cal.App.2d 136] 'all other legal grounds' in addition to the ground of insufficiency of the evidence. This the court had no right to do. Hence its acti......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT