Legal Opinion

Rowe v. Chandler

California Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1850PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from the superior court of the city of San Francisco. The point on which the judgment of the court is based, is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The cause was twice argued. On the first argument, the court, taking for its guide the case of Merri field v. Cooley, {iHow. N. Y.Pr. Ilep. 272,) reversed the judgment of the superior court.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the superior court of the city of San Francisco. The point on which the judgment of the court is based, is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The cause was twice argued. On the first argument, the court, taking for its guide the case of Merri field v. Cooley, {iHow. N. Y.Pr. Ilep. 272,) reversed the judgment of the superior court. The opinion was delivered by Bennett, J., as follows: “ The action was brought against the defendants Chandler & “ Dennison upon an alleged joint indebtedness. Process was “ served on both of them; but the plaintiff, at the trial, failed “…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Bennett, J.

The complaint alleges an indebtedness by the defendants as partners. The answer denies the indebtedness. At the trial, the plaintiff made out a cause of action against the defendant, Chandler, but failed to establish a joint indebtedness of both defendants. The jury brought in a verdict in favor of Chandler and against Dennison, and judgment was rendered in accordance with such verdict. The question is thus presented, whether, if, in an action on contract against two or more defendants, the plaintiff fails to make out *169the joint liability of all, he may take judgment…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. MINOR v. the Mechanics Bank of AlexandriaSupreme Court of the United States · 1828

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Brownell v. GebhardtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. Stearns v. AguirreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  3. Moore v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  4. Dobbs v. PuringtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Fetz v. C. S. Clark & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1862

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API