Continental Bank v. Phoenix Insurance

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 392·1972 Cal. App. LEXIS 1176·24 Cal. App. 3d 909
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 14, 1972Civ. 38925California1,604 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dunn, J.

Plaintiff bank sued for money allegedly owing from defendant, based upon defendant’s issuance of a surety bond to plaintiff. From a judgment for defendant after a non jury trial, plaintiff appeals. Appellant contends the court’s findings VHI and IX are unsupported by evidence and, additionally, that such findings are “erroneous as a matter of law.”

We must view the evidence in a manner tending to sustain the judgment, resolving all conflicts in its favor and drawing from the evidence all favorable inferences reasonably deducible. (Estate of Bristol (1943) 23 Cal.2d 221, 223-224 [ 143 P.2d 689 ]; Hicks v. Reis (1943) 21 Cal.2d 654, 660-661 [ 134 P.2d 788 ].) The record shows that Leon Chabot, Joseph Chabot and Fred Nestroyl were partners doing a custom picture framing business in Los Angeles as “Framecraft.” Ben Wilks was employed by Framecraft as an artist. Sometime before September 27, 1963, the three partners created C.C.N. & W. Co., Inc., a corporation, to manufacture picture plaques; its place of business was in West Los Angeles. Although Framecraft continued in business, Ben Wilks started to work for C.C.N. & W. Co., as an artist. (The initials, of course, stand for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.