Nathan

Nathan v. Locke

Good Law
108 Cal. App. 158·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 145·287 P. 550
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 1930Docket No. 7124.California1,917 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons given in our former opinion filed April 28, 1930, and reported in 287 Pac. 550 . The motion to file certain documentary evidence is granted.

A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the District Court of Appeal on October 8, 1930, and a petition by appellants to have the cause heard in the Supreme Court, after judgment in the District Court of Appeal, was denied by the Supreme Court on November 2, 1930.

The following is the opinion of April 28, 1930, rendered in the above-entitled cause:

Plaintiff sued for contribution against each of the defendants upon a final judgment which had been rendered against the three. Plaintiff had a several judgment against each of the defendants, from which they join in an appeal upon typewritten transcripts.

The three parties were co-owners of real property situated in Mendocino County. Plaintiff held an undivided one-half interest and each of the defendants held an undivided one-quarter interest in the property. The three owners joined in a written lease to one Miller on May 16, 1922. In September, 1922, Miller notified the plaintiff herein that he would be unable to pay the balance of the…

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.