Moss v. Boyle

MOORE, P. J.

This is an appeal upon the judgment roll. The court below dismissed the action as to defendants in their individual capacities but awarded plaintiffs the sum of $862 against defendants in their capacity as executors of the estate of Allen R. Ratterree, deceased.

The complaint set forth three causes of action, the first of which was a common count on

quantum meruit

in the sum of $3,500. The trial proceeded upon the first count “and the denials thereof” and upon a plea of payment.

Prom the findings, it appears that plaintiffs are co-partners doing business as accountants, and that one of them is a practicing attorney at law; that defendants were duly qualified and acting executors of the Ratterree estate; that pursuant to the request of defendants, plaintiffs rendered services in connection with the accounting and tax problems arising in relation to the administration of such estate; that the reasonable, value of services rendered was $862.50, no part of which was ever paid.

On motion of defendants, the court dismissed the action against the defendants, in their individual capacities and entered judgment against them in their representative capacities.

The question for our determination is whether the judgment is supported by the findings.

Where an appeal is taken upon the judgment roll alone, the findings are conclusively presumed to be supported by the evidence and they must be liberally construed so as to sustain, if possible, rather than defeat the judgment appealed from. Any ambiguity or inconsistency in the findings must be resolved in favor of the judgment.

(Keim

v.

Roether,

32 Cal. App. (2d) 70, 73 [89 Pac. (2d) 187].) “The judg

[413]

ment will not be reversed except for some fatal error appearing on the face of the judgment roll”.