Court Opinion

ID: 9864594
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 14:14:16.507408+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:19:07.551197
License: Public Domain

THE COURT.
The petition for a rehearing is denied; but in thus denying the petition it is proper to say that noth*594ing in the former opinion should be construed as indicating our views as to whether or not the judgment entered against the copartnership may or may not be enforced against the individual property of the member of the copartnership served with the summons issued on the original complaint. As indicated in the original opinion, section 388, Code of Civil Procedure, as it existed when the action was brought, provided only that the judgment should bind the joint property of the associates, while the same section as amended before judgment was rendered provides that the judgment shall also bind the property of the member served with process. As no appeal was taken from the judgment against the copartnership, we do not consider it either necessary or proper to determine its scope and effect.