Legal Opinion
Berg v. Berg
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 4, 1943No. Civ. No. 13823PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DRAPEAU, J. pro tem.
Omitting recitals, the judgment appealed from is as follows: “That plaintiff, Rose Berg, recover of and from the said defendant, doing business under the fictitious firm name and style of Mortuary Management, the sum of $1687.50.”
Two parties defendant were named in the complaint, first, as individuals, secondly, as parties defendant doing business under a fictitious firm name, and thirdly, as parties defendant doing business as co-partners.
The trial court found that the defendants were not doing business under a fictitious name, nor as co-partners; that one of them as…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Chetwood v. California National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Stoneman v. FritzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Switzer v. YuntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Palmer v. FixCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Renwick v. GarlandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Palpar, Inc. v. ThayerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Oakley v. RosenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946