Stewart v. Spaulding
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The complaint in the action in Nevada described the defendants as copartners. The defendant Sherman alone was personally served with summons or appeared therein. By the law of Nevada, interest on judgments is allowed at the rate of ten per cent per annum.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The complaint in the action in Nevada described the defendants as copartners. The defendant Sherman alone was personally served with summons or appeared therein. By the law of Nevada, interest on judgments is allowed at the rate of ten per cent per annum. In the present action, the plaintiffs were allowed interest on the entire judgment at the rate of seven per cent. The further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
Suit was brought by the plaintiffs, describing themselves as late partners, against A. L. Sherman alone, upon a judgment recovered in the state of Nevada against Sherman and three others.
This complaint was demurred to on various grounds, one of which was non-joinder of the other defendants in the Nevada judgment. The demurrer was sustained and the plaintiff amended, making all the judgment debtors parties, and omitting the designation of the plaintiffs as late partners. In other words, they sued simply as individuals, setting up, however, the same judgment as before. No other defendant was…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Biewend v. BiewendCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Grant v. McAuliffeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Zinn v. Ex-Cell-O Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1957
- Crescent Canal Co. v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Dorr Cattle Co. v. Des Moines National BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.