Legal Opinion

Busick v. Stoetzl

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 6, 1968No. Civ. 891PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

This is an appeal from an interlocutory judgment in a partnership dissolution action. Prior to July 19, 1950, Valley Peed & Fuel Company did business as a corporation. It then changed to a partnership, former shareholders taking an interest in the ratio to their ownership of corporate shares. The partnership business that emerged was composed of three husbands and wives: plaintiff, Anna Busick, then Anna Betters, and Walter, her deceased husband, Ralph E. and Rolline Stoetzl, and William and Cora Prey. The written partnership agreement vested management of the business in the three husbands,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Heck v. HeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  2. Vangel v. VangelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Griggs v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
  4. Thompson v. KecklerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  5. Dugan v. ForsterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hooper v. YoderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  2. Broffman v. NewmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  3. Larsen v. ClaridgeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API