Wong

Associated Creditors' Agency v. Wong

Good Law
216 Cal. App. 2d 61·30 Cal. Rptr. 705
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 13, 1963Civ. 20711California1,659 words

Opinion

Opinion

Devine, J.

The question in this case is whether there is substantial evidence to support the finding that respondents Delight Wong and Stanley Mah were not partners in a firm purchasing supplies and insurance from plaintiffs’ assignors within four years prior to the filing of the complaints, the earliest of which was on January 29, 1957.

Facts and Law Relating to Alleged Partnership

In 1948, about 140 persons, including respondents, formed a firm with Henry Wong, patriarch of the enterprise, and shares of “stock” were sold to all without benefit of permit by the Commissioner of Corporations. It was called Shew Fung Company, and it engaged in grocery and liquor business. Respondent Wong put up $2,000 and respondent Mah, $1,500 of a total capital of $85,000. It is admitted by all parties to the appeal that the organization constituted a partnership in fact, and that all of the “shareholders” had the liabilities of partners, until the death of Henry Wong in 1949. His widow succeeded him, by Chinese custom, in the control of the business as holder of the largest share, and she in turn told her son, Jack Chinn, to manage it. Respondent Mah testified that from that time he considered himself…

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.