Messick

This is an action to recover a balance alleged due for goods sold and delivered. The complaint is in two counts. The first count alleges a balance due plaintiffs on their own account and the second count is upon an assigned claim. Judgment went for plaintiffs on both counts and defendant appeals from the said judgment and the whole thereof.

Three points are raised by appellants, as follows: 1. That plaintiffs have no right to maintain the action by reason of their noncompliance with sections 2466 and 2468 of the Civil Code; 2. That the assignor of plaintiffs in the second cause of action likewise failed to comply with the same sections; 3. That there is no evidence to show an assignment of the claim sued upon in the second cause of action.

A consideration of these points requires some statement of the facts upon which the contentions of appellant predicate.

The complaint alleges that plaintiffs were at all times therein mentioned, and at the time of the commencement of the action, copartners doing business under the firm name of Messick & Kirkpatrick. The answer of defendant alleges that plaintiffs have not legal capacity to sue or maintain the action, in this, that said…