Stoddart v. Van Dyke

12 Cal. 437
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1859
StatusPublished

This text of 12 Cal. 437 (Stoddart v. Van Dyke) 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
Stoddart v. Van Dyke, 12 Cal. 437 (Cal. 1859).

Opinion

Terry, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court—Baldwin, J., concurring.

This was an action against defendants, as partners on a promissory note, signed Van Dyke, McDonald and Calderwood. Van Dyke and McDonald made default, and the defendant Calderwood answered, denying the partnership, and the execution of the note sued on by himself, or any person authorized for him.

A nonsuit was ordered as to Calderwood, and judgment given against the other defendants, and plaintiff appealed.

We can see no error in the judgment of nonsuit. The evidence entirely failed to show a partnership, or any authority in McDonald, by whom the note was given, to bind Calderwood by such a contract.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 Cal. 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stoddart-v-van-dyke-cal-1859.