Kirsch

Kirsch v. Huber

Good Law
264 F.2d 387
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 21, 1959No. 15345California5,294 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Pope, J.

Appellant Kirsch, who was plaintiff below, and a citizen of the State of New York, owned a large quantity of standing timber located in Humboldt County, California. He entered into a contract in writing with the appellees other than Crawford, all of them citizens of California, which provided for the logging and sale of the timber. The general arrangement was that Kirsch should be paid a stated stumpage price on all logs sold; appellee Barnes was to manage the operations and cause the lands to be logged, and appellees Huber and Goodwin, who were members of a law partnership, were to collect the proceeds of the sales, pay the bills and keep the books. Profits on the operations were to be divided 37% % to Kirsch, 37%% to Barnes, and 25% to Huber and Goodwin.

The contract was executed on October 16, 1952, and logging was begun through the employment of various loggers who were engaged by the associates through Barnes. On June 23, 1953, all of the parties to that contract entered into a second contract in writing with appellee Crawford, a logging contractor, who agreed to “yard and load” specific varieties of timber which the associates should cause to be felled and bucked, and to…

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.