From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnstead v. Empire Mining Co.

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1855
5 Cal. 299 (Cal. 1855)

Summary

In Barnstead v. Empire Mining Co., 5 Cal. 299, it was held that one partner could not sue the other in an action at law.

Summary of this case from Freeman v. Donohoe

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court of the Tenth Judicial District, Nevada County.

         COUNSEL:

         Dibble & Thayer, for Appellants.

          Conn, Dunn & Smith, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Murray, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Bryan, J., and Heydenfeldt, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          MURRAY, Judge

         There is no ground in this case which seriously warrants an appeal. The right of a member of an incorporated company to sue the incorporation has never, to our knowledge, been doubted, and in this very right consists one of the essential differences between incorporations and mere partnerships; for in the latter, one partner cannot sue in an action at law, but must file his bill in equity for a dissolution and an account.

         There was no error in excluding the defendants' evidence; they were directly interested in the result of the judgment, and incompetent under the statute.

         Much stress was laid in argument upon the order of the Court directing the defendants to produce books and papers. The order was correct, and made upon the authority of the statute. The other objections are frivolous.

         Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Barnstead v. Empire Mining Co.

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1855
5 Cal. 299 (Cal. 1855)

In Barnstead v. Empire Mining Co., 5 Cal. 299, it was held that one partner could not sue the other in an action at law.

Summary of this case from Freeman v. Donohoe
Case details for

Barnstead v. Empire Mining Co.

Case Details

Full title:Thomas S. Barnstead, Respondent, v. The Empire Mining Company, Appellants

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jul 1, 1855

Citations

5 Cal. 299 (Cal. 1855)

Citing Cases

Mokelumne Hill Canal & Mining Co. v. Woodbury

The liability of the witness is not secondary. (Wood's Dig. 121; Bamstead v. Empire Mining Co. 5 Cal. …

McAuley v. York Mining Co.

COUNSEL          Cited Prac. Act, Secs. 421, 422; Stat. 1850, p. 350, Sec. 32; p. 347, Sec. 4; p. 206, Sec.…