Clark v. Gridley
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. Clark and Perkins, who were partners, doing business in the city of San Francisco, on the first day of April, 1865, entered into an agreement in writing with Gridley, who resided in the city of Marysville, by which Gridley undertook to purchase wool in Marysville and the country adjacent thereto, and ship the same to Clark and Perkins.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. Clark and Perkins, who were partners, doing business in the city of San Francisco, on the first day of April, 1865, entered into an agreement in writing with Gridley, who resided in the city of Marysville, by which Gridley undertook to purchase wool in Marysville and the country adjacent thereto, and ship the same to Clark and Perkins. Clark and Perkins were to pay all drafts drawn by Gridley to pay for the wool, and to receive the wool in San Francisco, and sell the same there or in a foreign market.…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
1. The defendant’s notice of his intention to move for. a new trial was not served or filed within the time required by law, and the motion was properly denied on this ground.
2. The appeal from the judgment was not taken within sixty days after the judgment was rendered; and, under section nine hundred and thirty-nine of the Code of Civil Procedure, we cannot on this appeal review the decision on the ground that it is not supported by the evidence.
3. The plaintiffs and defendant were clearly partners in the venture to which the contract between them related; and the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Westcott v. GilmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Shepard v. YaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- In re Rose's EstateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888