In Steiner v. Thomas (1949) 94 Cal.App.2d 655, two successive actions were brought against an administrator of a decedent's estate for the purpose of recovering a certain parcel of real property which had been transferred to the decedent by the plaintiff before the decedent's death. The first action was for rescission based upon fraud, alleging that the realty had been transferred so as to permit the decedent to collect rents and that the decedent had promised to reconvey the property at a later date. The second lawsuit was based upon an alleged breach of an agreement to devise the property to the plaintiff, as evidenced by two letters from the decedent to the plaintiff. The court resolved the question of res judicata against the plaintiff, focusing on the identity or similarity of facts litigated in the first suit as compared to those in issue at the second suit. The court stated: "The fact is that in the former action the merits of all the facts were determined and relief was denied . . . . Upon presentation of the special plea in the instant action the court had merely to decide whether the facts alleged in the first suit for rescission of the contract were substantially those alleged in the second action for breach of the same contract." ( Steiner v. Thomas, supra, 94 Cal.App.2d at p. 658.) The court thus construed the situation as one in which alternative remedies in contract were successively brought -- related to the same contract -- rather than a case in which an action on contract was followed by an action for an intentional tort related to or as part of the transaction giving rise to the contract.