Legal Opinion
Linz v. McIver & Becker
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 28, 1916No. Civ. No. 1692PublishedCited by 4 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
In this action the plaintiff and respondent, F. J. Linz, procured a judgment to be entered against the defendant F. G. Becker upon the latter’s default. The judgment purports to run against him individually and not as a member of the copartnership. The general allegations of the complaint were sufficient in the absence of a general demurrer to charge the defendant as an individual maker of the promissory note sued upon. The complaint, however, contains a copy of the note, which shows that defendant Becker signed his name thereto as a member of the firm of McIver & Becker and not as…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Blasingame v. Home Ins. Co. of City of N.Y.California Supreme Court · 1888
- Mendocino County v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- San Francisco Sulphur Co. v. Aetna Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1909
- Palmer v. LavigneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by4 opinions
- Webb v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Miller & Lux, Inc. v. San Joaquin Light & Power Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1932
- Kennard v. BinneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Webb v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927