Curry v. White
51 Cal. 530
This text of 51 Cal. 530 (Curry v. White) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Curry v. White, 51 Cal. 530 (Cal. 1876).
Opinion
The defendants, McMullen and Roundtree, are not responsible upon the note in the case, which was made after the [532]*532dissolution of the partnership. Nor are they responsible upon the original account, because the same was barred by the Statute of Limitations.
Judgment and order reversed as to -the-defendants, McMullen and Roundtree.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Steinbach v. Smith
167 P. 189 (California Court of Appeal, 1917)
Bank of Montreal v. Page
98 Ill. 109 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1880)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
51 Cal. 530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curry-v-white-cal-1876.