Rassaert

Rassaert v. Mensch

Good Law
17 Cal. App. 637·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 18·120 P. 1072
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 12, 1911Civ. No. 834.California2,659 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

In plaintiffs’ amended complaint they pray that the partnership existing between plaintiffs and defendant be dissolved; for an accounting, and “for such other further and separate relief as may be meet in the premises.” The original complaint was filed November 23, 1907, and prayed, among other things, that defendant be restrained from interfering with the partnership property. In their amended complaint plaintiffs allege that plaintiffs and defendant entered into a written agreement of copartnership on September 17, 1907, under the name of the Concrete Products Company, and that said partnership “is engaged in the business of manufacture and selling various products of concrete”; that “defendant has failed to perform his duties under said agreement and in many respects has violated the terms of said agreement.” Defendant’s shortcomings are thus specified: “Said defendant agreed to furnish the money necessary to carry on said business, but he has neglected and refused to do so; by said agreement plaintiff above named, Oscar Rassaert, was made superintendent of construction and was given superintendence of all of the construction work of said partnership; said defendant has…

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.