Ingraham v. Gildemeester
California Supreme Court
- Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, for the County of San Joaquin. The respondents filed their complaint against the appellants and one Buffon, as parties, stating, that in September, 1850, they purchased by sample, and received from the defendants, 25 barrels of pork, at the then market price of good pork, and which the defendants represented to be as good as the samples; but which was not good pork, nor like the samples, but unfit for market,…
Read the full summary
- Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, for the County of San Joaquin. The respondents filed their complaint against the appellants and one Buffon, as parties, stating, that in September, 1850, they purchased by sample, and received from the defendants, 25 barrels of pork, at the then market price of good pork, and which the defendants represented to be as good as the samples; but which was not good pork, nor like the samples, but unfit for market, &e.; to the plaintiffs’ damage, $1000’; for which „they prayed judgment, &e. The process was returned, “served” on…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Heydenfeldt
The objection relied on to reverse the judgment is, that three parties are sued as partners, and the verdict and judgment are against two only. It appears from the record that the party not found against, was not served with process. In such case, our statute expressly allows the plaintiff to proceed alone against those who are served. But it is insisted by the appellants, that this party was in Court, because he is charged in the declaration as a partner of the others; and they say that service upon one partner, is service upon all. Such is not the rule in this State. To sustain a judgment…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Dillard v. McKnightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Hunt's Heirs v. Ellison's HeirsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Schloss v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860