Farmers & Merchants Bank v. Kirk
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtHerndon, J.
The sole question presented by this appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the trial court’s finding that defendant and appellant, Conn Pulos, was a partner in the firm described as Amboy-Cal Gypsum Company, a copartnership.
Plaintiff recovered a deficiency judgment against appellant and others in the sum of $3,805.84 after repossession and sale of certain tractor equipment which originally had been sold under a conditional sales contract. The trial court found that Albert A. Robbins, Harry Wind and appellant Pulos were partners, doing business under the name of Amboy-Cal Gypsum…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Estate of Bristol v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Primm v. PrimmCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Spier v. LangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Kersch v. TaberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Lyon v. MacQuarrieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Anderson Hay and Grain Co. v. DunnNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1970
- Calada Materials Co. v. CollinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Sandberg v. JacobsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967