Legal Opinion

Burke v. Chrostowski

California Supreme Court

Decided May 4, 1956No. L. A. 23979PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment for defendant in an action between partners following the dissolu tion of the partnership. Their principal contention is that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the trial court’s findings which resulted in the denial of their alleged claim of $2,500 upon settlement of the partnership affairs. In determining this question, it is well settled that “an appellate court must accept as true all evidence tending to establish the correctness of the finding [s] as made, taking into account, as well, all inferences which might reasonably have been thought by the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Bancroft-Whitney Co. v. McHughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Hamilton v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Zeibak v. NasserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Vangel v. VangelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Maslow v. MaslowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. City of Salinas v. Souza & McCue Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Mashon v. HaddockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  3. Green v. GreenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  4. Monell v. College of Physicians & SurgeonsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  5. Alfred M. Lewis, Inc. v. WAREHOUSEMEN ETC. L. NO. 542California Court of Appeal · 1958

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