Legal Opinion

Nicholson v. Auburn Gold Mining & Milling Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 3, 1907No. Civ. No. 365PublishedCited by 11 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.

Action for the value of certain goods, wares and merchandise. A general demurrer was overruled and defendant answered, averring, among other things, that plaintiffs should not be permitted to maintain this action because they are a partnership transacting business in this state under a designation not showing the names of the persons interested as partners, as required by sections 2466 and 2468 of the Civil Code. The complaint was filed November 7, 1905. The first publication of the certificate of copartnership was on November 4, 1905, and was repeated thereafter November 11th, 18th, 25th,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Carlock v. CagnacciCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. California Savings & Loan Society v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Byers v. BourretCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
  4. Sweeney v. StanfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  5. Cook v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Bleecker v. MillerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  2. Madison Fork Ranch v. L & B Lodge Pole Timber ProductsMontana Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Wilcox v. ClowardUtah Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Reilly v. HathewayMontana Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Riverdale Mining Co. v. WicksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910

6 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