Etchemende v. Stearns
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Seventeenth Judicial District, County of Los Angeles. The plaintiff sued the two defendants on a promissory note made by Turner, who signed the names of “ Stearns and Turner ’’ to it. The complaint alleged that the defendants were partners and made the note as partners. Stearns answered, denying the partnership.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Seventeenth Judicial District, County of Los Angeles. The plaintiff sued the two defendants on a promissory note made by Turner, who signed the names of “ Stearns and Turner ’’ to it. The complaint alleged that the defendants were partners and made the note as partners. Stearns answered, denying the partnership. Stearns had commenced an action against Turner in the same Court in which this action was brought, to recover a large sum of money alleged by him to be his due on transactions connected with the running of a flouring mill. It was in relation to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Rhodes, J.:
Eor the purpose of proving the alleged partnership between Stearns and Turner, the Court Commisssioner admitted in evidence, against the objection of the defendant, a number of affidavits which had been obtained by Turner, and filed in the case of Stearns v. Turner, for the purpose of dissolving an attachment. The main purpose for which they were used in that case, was to prove the principal point in issue in this case—the partnership between Stearns and Turner—which is affirmed by the latter, and denied by the former. We cannot conceive of any principle which would…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Orofino Rochdale Co. v. Fred A. Shore Lumber Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1927
- Taylor v. EscandonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875