Schefski

Schefski v. Anker

Good Law
1932 Cal. LEXIS 622·216 Cal. 624·15 P.2d 744
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 31, 1932Docket No. S.F. 14427.California1,743 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Both plaintiff Schefski and defendant Anker appeal from a judgment in an action brought by plaintiff for the dissolution of an alleged partnership and for an accounting. The Bank of Italy was made a purely nominal defendant and does not appeal. Both appeals have been presented on one transcript.

The facts in reference to the alleged partnership are as follows: In 1926, Schefski was a contractor engaged in acting as a foreman in the construction of various kinds of buildings. Anker desired to invest his money in building operations. Negotiations between the two resulted in a written agreement dated September 23, 1926. By the terms of this agreement, Schefski and Anker agreed to co-operate in the erection of an apartment house on Clayton Street in San Francisco, the lot to be purchased by Anker and to be deeded under his name; all bank loans and all expenses to be deposited in and paid from a special account to be taken under Anker’s name; both parties to draw an equal salary; all net profits to be divided equally, Anker to receive $500 for each four months his money was invested, as interest. Although challenged by appellant Anker, there can be no doubt that the parties intended…

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.