In Mansfield v. Pickwick Stages (1923) 191 Cal. 129, the California Supreme Court held that claimants who filed an action in San Francisco County, dismissed that action, and then refiled in Monterey County did not irrevocably elect their remedies. "Of course, under the well-settled principles of the doctrine of estoppel, the disadvantage here referred to must be a real injury, such as would, in contemplation of law, amount to a fraud upon the party invoking the estoppel. When it is of this character the doctrine of election of remedies will be applied by the courts. The sole injury claimed to have been suffered by the appellant herein is that it was put to the expense of preparing to present to the San Francisco court its motion for change of venue. If this should be held such an injury as to give rise to an estoppel, the logical conclusion must be that the plaintiff, by having filed and then dismissed his action in San Francisco, should be barred thereby from thereafter prosecuting the same in any court. 'The rule has long been established that a judgment of dismissal given upon motion of the plaintiff before the hearing or trial of any issue of law or fact, and without any determination of the merits of the cause, is no bar to a subsequent suit in any court upon the same cause of action.' It has been held that where one brings an action for the recovery of the purchase money paid upon the theory that the contract was rescinded, and a judgment of nonsuit is rendered because no rescission of the contract had been proved, the plaintiff may afterward bring an action for specific performance of the contract ; also that the bringing of an action for rescission of a contract for exchange of properties in which a nonsuit is granted because of a failure to tender a deed to defendant before suit brought is not a bar to an action for damages for fraudulent representations. Manifestly the defendant in each of the foregoing cases was put to vastly more expense and inconvenience than was the defendant herein." ( Mansfield, supra, 191 Cal. 129 at pp. 131-132.)