Legal Opinion
Dugan v. Forster
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 18, 1930No. Docket Nos. 6634, 6901PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
The defendants for some time previous to January 29, 1923, were copartners doing business under the firm name and style of William J. Forster Company. On that date they entered into an agreement in writing with the plaintiff, who Avas named therein as the party of the second part, whereby he became a special partner in the business for the purpose of sharing the profits, it being stipulated that any loss should be borne by the defendants. The agreement provided that each partner should take an active part in the business, one of the defendants being the business manager, the other…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- North-Western Mutual Life Insurance v. MooneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Dukes v. KelloggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Nevills v. Moore Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1902
- Clement v. DuncanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- People v. ChildsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Heck v. HeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Merlino v. West Coast Macaroni Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1949
- Pitzer v. WedelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Upton v. GouldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Combs v. RitterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.