Luke v. Smith
Arizona Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the Third Judicial District, in and for Maricopa County. Edward Kent, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
The second amended complaint in this action was before us in Smith v. Rainey, 9 Ariz. 362, 83 Pac. 463, and was held by us not to state a cause of action. Upon appeal to the supreme court of the United States, that court held that the agreement between Smith and Rainey constituted them partners, and gave to Smith a partner’s lien upon the land, as a partnership asset; reversed the judgment of this court, and remanded it for trial. 209 U. S. 53, 28 Sup. Ct. 474, 52 L. Ed. 679.
The opinions above indicated set forth the substance of the complaint and of the agreement attached to it. By their…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Simmons Creek Coal Co. v. DoranSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- White v. McGregorTexas Supreme Court · 1899
- Paris Grocer Co. v. W.H. BurksTexas Supreme Court · 1907
- Crumlish v. Railroad Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1889
- Maul v. RiderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Hill v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
- Shalimar Ass'n v. D.O.C. Enterprises, Ltd.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
- Neal v. HuntArizona Supreme Court · 1975
- Heatherwood Holdings, LLC v. First Commercial BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 2010
- Blalak v. Mid Valley Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.