Holzman v. De Escamilla
Court of Appeal of California
195 P.2d 833 (1948)
- Written by Max Milstein, JD
Facts
James Russell, H.W. Andrews, and Ricardo de Escamilla (defendants) were partners in Hacienda Farms, a limited partnership. Russell and Andrews were limited partners and Escamilla was the general partner. Escamilla always conferred with Russell and Andrews on what crops to plant, and Russell and Andrews sometimes overruled him. Any checks drawn on Hacienda’s account had to be signed by at least two of the partners, meaning that Escamilla could not withdraw money on his own. Eventually, Russell and Andrews forced Escamilla to leave his job as manager. Hacienda Farms went bankrupt, and the bankruptcy trustee, Lawrence Holzman (plaintiff), sued all three partners on behalf of Hacienda’s creditors. The lower court ruled that Russell and Andrews, through their direct control of the enterprise’s operations, had become general partners. Russell and Andrews appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Marks, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
