Treat v. Murdock
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
The appellants in this case were held liable for the balance alleged to be due to the respondents upon an open book account. The judgment against them is based upon a finding that they were copartners with the defendant Murdock and others in a mining venture. Appellants contend that the evidence shows that at the times in question they were creditors of Murdock and that no partnership existed.
Prior to July, 1933, James A. Murdock had acquired some interest in what is known as the Rising Star placer mining claim in Calaveras County. He commenced to operate the mine in July, and continued these…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Spier v. LangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Prince v. LambCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Peterson v. BeggsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Stuart v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Chung Kee v. DavidsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Davis v. MorrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Rae v. CameronMontana Supreme Court · 1941
- Long Island Lighting Co. v. Bokum Resources Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico · 1983
- Maguire v. LeesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Eriksson v. WiseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.