Meyers v. Merillion
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of tbe Superior Court of tbe City and County of San Francisco. J. C. B. Iiebbard, Judge. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Plaintiffs averred tbat tbey are copartners engaged in tbe business of box manufacturing. In October, 1895, the then existing firm of Meyers, Merillion & Co. was engaged in tbe same business. Tbe latter firm consisted of tbe plaintiff Meyers and tbe defendant Merillion. By agreement of tbe partners this firm was dissolved, Meyers buying Merillion’s interest in the property and in tbe goodwill of tbe business under a written agreement in part as follows: “And in consideration of tbe payment to me of the foregoing sum, and as part of tbe consideration for such payment, I do hereby agree with…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Russell v. Clark's ExecutorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1812
- Santa Clara Valley Mill and Lumber Co. v. HayesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- City Carpet Beating Etc. Works v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Herriman v. MenziesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Vulcan Powder Co. v. Hercules Powder Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Speegle v. Board of Fire UnderwritersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Edgecomb v. EdmonstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- De La Beckwith v. SheldonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- General Paint Corp. v. SeymourCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Merchants' Ad-Sign Co. v. SterlingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.