Legal Opinion
Bissell v. King
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 30, 1928No. Docket No. 6193PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, J., pro tem.
This action is upon a promissory note brought against J. Charles King and George W. Lamb, individually and as copartners doing business under the firm name and style of King & Company and King & Company, a copartnership.
King & Company is the name of a partnership composed of appellant Lamb and the defendant King. The partnership was formed for the purpose of conducting the business of draying. King was to manage the business, but under the articles of copartnership executed November 1, 1906, had no power to incur any indebtedness other than for current expenses. King…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Alhambra Addition Water Co. v. RichardsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Ralphs v. HenslerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Coveny v. HaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Jessen v. Peterson, Nelson & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1912
- Mott v. EwingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Rakestraw v. RodriguesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Gardiner v. GaitherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Nels E. Nelson, Inc. v. TarmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Gaine v. AustinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Harris v. SeidellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.