O'Keefe v. McDonald
Hawaii Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OP THE COURT BY
PETERS, J.
This is a suit in equity for the dissolution of a partnership and accounting. At the close of petitioner’s case the respondent, without resting, moved to dismiss the bill on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the allegations of an existing copartnership. The motion was granted and decree entered accordingly. Hence this appeal.
Revised Laws of Hawaii 1945, section 12411, which was in effect at the time of trial, provides: “If at the close of petitioner’s case it shall appear to the judge presiding that the evidence adduced in behalf of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Metropolitan Railroad v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Ross v. RiffleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Mosekian v. GinsbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Zetsche v. Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1909
- Ferry v. CarlsmithHawaii Supreme Court · 1917
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.