Relaxacizor, Inc. v. W. B. Geissinger & Co.

SHINN, P. J.

Plaintiff and defendant are corporations. Defendant, an advertising agency, placed plaintiff’s advertising in national magazines upon a commission basis. The relationship existed for a number of years until it was terminated by plaintiff in July 1961. It was customary for defendant to render monthly statements for plaintiff’s approval. After the employment of defendant was terminated plaintiff brought suit for $3,789.07 upon an account stated and for money had and received. Defendant answered with denials and filed a cross-complaint for $9,140.51, one of the causes of action alleging an account stated in that amount. The court found that defendant was indebted to plaintiff in the amount of $3,789.07 for which it was given judgment, with costs. The court also found that plaintiff was indebted to defendant in the amount of $3,855.01 for which sum, with costs, defendant was given judgment. Plaintiff appeals.

The principal ground of the appeal is that the findings are so vague, ambiguous and uncertain as to furnish no support for the judgment. The attack is limited to the findings on the cross-complaint.

Defendant has not filed a brief and plaintiff has waived oral argument. Pursuant to rule 17(b), California Rules of Court,

*

the appeal was ordered submitted upon plaintiff’s brief.

The findings were prepared by defendant’s attorneys. Plaintiff did not object to them, request other findings or question the adequacy of the findings upon its motion for a new trial. It could be denied the right to raise the point upon appeal.

(Moore

v.

Craig, 5

Cal.App.2d 283 [42 P.2d 647];

Robison

v.

Hanley,

136 Cal.App.2d 820 [289 P.2d 560].)

Defendant, by means of a brief, could have questioned plaintiff’s right to attack the findings for insufficiency, but it has waived the point by failing to file a brief. Therefore,

[21]