Brown

Brown v. Barnett

Good Law
111 Cal. App. 456·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 1189·295 P. 579
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 1931Docket No. 6187.California633 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Conrey, J.

By the complaint the plaintiffs alleged that on January 12, 1925, defendant received the sum of $1256.50 to and for the use of plaintiffs. The complaint further alleged demand for payment, refusal of payment and nonpayment. The answer of defendant denied that at the time stated or at any time he received said alleged sum, or any sum, to or for the use of plaintiffs; and admitted the demand and refusal of payment.

The findings of fact are that all the allegations of the complaint are true and that all of the allegations of the answer are untrue. There is a further finding as follows: “That a partnership existed between the above named parties, plaintiffs and defendant, and that each was entitled to an undivided one-third interest in and to the earnings of the business, known as Thomas D. Barnett Company, as conducted at and during the times mentioned in plaintiffs’ complaint and that in accordance with said partnership conditions and agreements, there is now due from defendant to plaintiffs the sum of One Thousand ($1,000.00) Dollars.”

The record shows that the plaintiffs were permitted to try the case as if the complaint had alleged a partnership between the plaintiffs and 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.