Legal Opinion
Royal Indemnity Co. v. Sherman
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 12, 1954No. Civ. 19891PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShinn, P. J.
William Fogel, Joseph W. Wolf and Jack Sherman, as partners, were engaged in the business of selling farm products as produce dealers or commission merchants from April 1, 1947, to July 16, 1949, when Fogel and Wolf withdrew from the firm. Sherman carried on the business until September 24,1949. Defendants received and sold products for which they failed to pay the shippers. Plaintiff had bonded the three partners, and later Sherman, pursuant to the provisions of division 6, chapter 6 of the Agricultural Code. The bond ran to the state for the benefit of shippers of produce to the defendants.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Davis v. Aetna Acceptance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Tinker v. ColwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Chapman v. Forsyth & LimerickSupreme Court of the United States · 1844
- McIntyre v. KavanaughSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Upshur v. BriscoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Honkanen v. Hopper (In Re Honkanen)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- People v. McCreeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- O'BRIEN v. ApplingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company v. TannerDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1968
- Larsen v. BeekmannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.