Estell v. Chenery

California Supreme Court

Estell v. Chenery

3 Cal. 467

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1853

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 Cal. 467 (Estell v. Chenery) 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

Estell v. Chenery, 3 Cal. 467 (Cal. 1853).

Pincite

Opinion

Murray, Chief Justice,

delivered the opinion of the court. Heydenfeldt, Justice, concurred.

The plaintiff commenced his action in the court below, against Chenery and others, as co-partners. Service was had on Chenery alone, who answered, denying all the allegations. No default was taken as to the other defendants, and upon the final hearing of the cause, the court rendered a joint judgment against all.

There is no sufficient finding of the facts and conclusions of law, by the court below, to sustain the judgment, the verdict being general.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Murray, Chief Justice,

delivered the opinion of the court. Heydenfeldt, Justice, concurred.

The plaintiff commenced his action in the court below, against Chenery and others, as co-partners. Service was had on Chenery alone, who answered, denying all the allegations. No default was taken as to the other defendants, and upon the final hearing of the cause, the court rendered a joint judgment against all.

There is no sufficient finding of the facts and conclusions of law, by the court below, to sustain the judgment, the verdict being general.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Cal. 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estell-v-chenery-cal-1853.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack