From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cheney v. J. R. Newberry & Co.

Supreme Court of California
Jun 23, 1885
67 Cal. 126 (Cal. 1885)

Opinion

         Department One

         Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County.

         COUNSEL:

         Satterwhite & Curtis, for Appellants.

          Henry M. Willis, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Ross, J. McKinstry, J., and McKee, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          ROSS, Judge

         Appellants contend that the provision of the Civil Code to the effect that persons doing business as partners, contrary to the provisions of the article requiring the filing and publishing of a certificate showing the names and residence of all of the members of the partnership, "shall not maintain any action upon or on account of any contracts made or transactions had in their partnership name," also preclude such persons from assigning a valid claim held by them as partners. There is nothing in the point.

         Judgment affirmed with ten per cent damages.


Summaries of

Cheney v. J. R. Newberry & Co.

Supreme Court of California
Jun 23, 1885
67 Cal. 126 (Cal. 1885)
Case details for

Cheney v. J. R. Newberry & Co.

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM H. CHENEY, Respondent, v. J. R. NEWBERRY&CO. Appellants

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jun 23, 1885

Citations

67 Cal. 126 (Cal. 1885)
7 P. 445

Citing Cases

Thorner v. Selective Cam Transmission Co.

Appellant also argues by analogy to the cases under the fictitious names statute (Civ. Code, § 2468) as it…

Smith v. Lewis

The inhibition contained in said section did not apply at that time to assignees of such fictitious…