McGarry v. Proffitt (1869) · DecisionDepot

McGarry v. Proffitt

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Aug 27, 1869 No. No. 1889Published

Before: Crockett, Rhodes, Sanderson, Sawyer, Sprague

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that Proffitt and Houston were tenants in common rather than partners, and therefore Proffitt lacked the legal authority to sell Houston's interest in the cattle.

Issues

Whether Proffitt and Houston were partners or tenants in common regarding the cattle in dispute.
Whether Proffitt had the authority to sell Houston's interest in the cattle.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Proffitt and Houston were not partners, but only tenants in common of the cattle in dispute, and as cotenant, Proffitt had no authority to sell Houston’s interest in them.”

Synopsis

APPEAL from Sixth Judicial District, Sacramento, California.

SAWYER, C. J. Upon the facts alleged in the complaint and found by the court, Proffitt and Houston were not partners, but only tenants in common of the cattle in dispute, and as cotenant, Proffitt had no authority to sell Houston’s interest in them. This is the principal question in the case. Without a particular discussion of the several minor questions raised, it is sufficient to say that we find nothing in this record to justify us in reversing the judgment.

Judgment and order affirmed.

We concur: Crockett, J.; Rhodes, J.; Sanderson„ J.; Sprague, J.

McGarry v. Proffitt

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief