Kierski v. Lick Co.
SAMUEL KIERSKI, Respondent, v. THE LICK COMPANY, Appellant
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco
- Trial judge
- John Hunt
- Outcome
- other — The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Abram M.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- The Court. — (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
THE COURT.
This is an action to recover judgment for the value of services rendered by an attorney at law.
From the evidence it appears that a portion of the services embraced in the claim of plaintiff against the defendant were rendered prior to the incorporation of the defendant, the *481 remainder of the services being rendered thereafter. The court in its findings limited the recovery to the services rendered to the defendant after its incorporation. It follows that the contention of the defendant that the evidence shows without conflict that the services were rendered prior to the incorporation of the defendant, and to an individual and not the corporation, is not borne out by the record. Lacking basis in fact this contention of the appellant is without merit; as is also its further contention that the finding as to the value of the services is not supported by the evidence.
The evidence amply sustains the findings of the trial court, and we find no error in the court’s rulings upon the admission of evidence.
Judgment affirmed.