PEOPLE v. HENDRICKSON

Reset A A Font size: Print

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.

The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Paul HENDRICKSON, Doing Business under the Fictitious Firm Name of Jinricky Company, Ltd., Defendant and Respondent.

The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. HOME BRAND BOTTLING COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent.

The PEOPLE of the State of California, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JINRICKY COMPANY, Inc., Defendant and Respondent.

Civ. 11391, 11392, 11393.

Decided: May 07, 1937

U. S. Webb, Atty. Gen., and Seibert L. Sefton, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the People. Erwin P. Werner and Edward Linder, both of Los Angeles, for respondents.

These three cases are similar in the pleadings, except as to names and amounts, and in the judgments rendered, to the case of People v. Tux Winery Company, 67 P.(2d) 752, this day decided by this court. The appeals were taken five weeks later. The parties have now stipulated in writing that these cases may be submitted for decision on the briefs on file in the Tux Winery Company Case.

For the reasons stated in the decision in that case, we also affirm the judgments in these cases.

Judgments affirmed.

CRAIL, Presiding Justice.

We concur: WOOD, J.; McCOMB, J.