Henning

Henning v. Clark

Good Law
1920 Cal. App. LEXIS 754·46 Cal. App. 551·189 P. 714
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 13, 1920Civ. No. 2690.California1,739 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

James, J.

Defendant has appealed from a judgment in favor of plaintiff for the principal sum of $650.

[1] It is alleged in the complaint of the plaintiff that Morganstern, McGee, Henning, Hendee, and Casebeer, prior to the first day of February, 1915, as attorneys and counselors at law, were engaged in the practice of their profession as copartners in the city of San Diego; that appellant Clark had been a client of the copartnership and that on the date mentioned a large amount of money was due the firm from appellant as fees for services rendered; that on August 6, 1915, the members of the copartnership settled and adjusted the accounts existing between the firm and appellant, and agreed that the indebtedness of Clark then was the sum of $650. It is further alleged that prior to the commencement of the action the individual members of the prior existing copartnership assigned and transferred to Henning, one of the members, all their right, title, and interest to the claim against Clark. The further essential allegation is contained in the complaint that demand had been duly made upon Clark for payment of the money and such demand had been refused. The name under which the firm of…

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.