Collins v. Meis
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
HAINES, J., pro tem.
During the times with which we are in this action concerned the plaintiff and respondent Collins and the defendant and appellant Meis were partners engaged in the bakery business. Meis worked as a baker and Collins handled the banking and largely attended to the outside work. It is claimed that there had formerly been a third partner, who had died and that in his place one Salman had become a member of the firm as a third partner. The firm account was kept in bank under the name ‘■‘Plome Bakery, E. Collins,” with the knowledge and acquiescence of Meis, if not with his…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bull v. CoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Johnson v. RosensteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Arnheim v. GordonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
3Cited by5 opinions
- Emerzian v. EmerzianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Lewis v. FirestoneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Van Fleet-Durkee, Inc. v. OysterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Montgomery v. RiessCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Tulsa County Excise Board v. Texas-Empire Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937