Kierski v. Lick Co.

California Court of Appeal

Kierski v. Lick Co.

156 P. 69, 29 Cal. App. 480, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 199

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 28, 1916

DocketCiv. No. 1695.

StatusPublished

This text of 156 P. 69 (Kierski v. Lick Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kierski v. Lick Co., 156 P. 69, 29 Cal. App. 480, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 199 (Cal. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

This is an action to recover judgment for the value of services rendered by an attorney at law.

From the evidence it appears that a portion of the services embraced in the claim of plaintiff against the defendant were rendered prior to the incorporation of the defendant, the *481 remainder of the services being rendered thereafter. The court in its findings limited the recovery to the services rendered to the defendant after its incorporation. It follows that the contention of the defendant that the evidence shows without conflict that the services were rendered prior to the incorporation of the defendant, and to an individual and not the corporation, is not borne out by the record. Lacking basis in fact this contention of the appellant is without merit; as is also its further contention that the finding as to the value of the services is not supported by the evidence.

The evidence amply sustains the findings of the trial court, and we find no error in the court’s rulings upon the admission of evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

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

THE COURT.

This is an action to recover judgment for the value of services rendered by an attorney at law.

From the evidence it appears that a portion of the services embraced in the claim of plaintiff against the defendant were rendered prior to the incorporation of the defendant, the *481 remainder of the services being rendered thereafter. The court in its findings limited the recovery to the services rendered to the defendant after its incorporation. It follows that the contention of the defendant that the evidence shows without conflict that the services were rendered prior to the incorporation of the defendant, and to an individual and not the corporation, is not borne out by the record. Lacking basis in fact this contention of the appellant is without merit; as is also its further contention that the finding as to the value of the services is not supported by the evidence.

The evidence amply sustains the findings of the trial court, and we find no error in the court’s rulings upon the admission of evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 P. 69, 29 Cal. App. 480, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kierski-v-lick-co-calctapp-1916.