Hayes

Hayes v. Knerr

Good Law
126 Cal. App. 183·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 477·14 P.2d 545
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 1932Docket No. 976.California544 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Marks, J.

Appellant and respondent were copartners engaged in construction work. A written partnership agreement was executed in April, 1926, which, among other things, provided that all losses and profits resulting from partner,ship operations were to be shared equally by the partners. During October, 1928, they effected a voluntary dissolution of the partnership and attempted to arrive at an amicable distribution of the partnership assets. They were unsuccessful in reaching such a settlement and this litigation followed, which resulted in an accounting and a judgment in favor of respondent in the sum of $1795.58. Appellant has appealed from this judgment and the order denying his motion for new trial. Such order is not appealable (sec. 963, Code Civ. Proc.).

While appellant states various grounds for a reversal of the judgment, we need consider but one of them here, namely, the charging against him on the accounting of $10,000, the par value of participating certificates or bonds of the Arcady Apartment Hotel Company, originally a partnership asset, when these certificates did not have a market value of that amount. In his opening brief appellant thus states the question before this…

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.