McKenzie

McKenzie v. Barling

Good Law
101 Cal. 459·1894 Cal. LEXIS 1058·36 P. 8
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 1894No. 18231California1,023 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

This is an appeal by some of the defendants from an order of the superior court denying their motion for a change of the place of trial.

The action was brought against the defendants, Bar- *460 ling, Cohen, W. F. Beck, and Alfred Beck, to recover a money judgment. The complaint avers that the defendants were partners in the business of receiving raisins, preparing them for market, and selling them— the profits to be divided with those furnishing the raisins in the raw state; that plaintiffs furnished them certain raisins which defendants prepared and sold for a certain amount of money; and that defendants refuse to pay plaintiffs any part of said money, etc. The suit was commenced in Fresno county. The defendants, Cohen and the two Becks, moved the court for a change of venue to Alameda county, upon the ground that Alameda and not Fresno is the “proper” county for the trial, because said defendants, Cohen and the Becks, reside in Alameda county. It is admitted, however, that the residence of the defendant Barling is in Fresno county.

We do not think that the court erred in denying the motion. In the first place, it cannot be said that under the general provision of the statute…

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.