Harry R. Leeds, Plaintiff-appellee, v. John Levey, Appellant, 443 F.2d 1363 (9th Cir. 1971)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; James M. Carter, Judge.
Stephen D. Miller (argued), of Miller, Glassman & Browning, Beverly Hills, Cal., Harry J. Cohen, of Shapiro & Cohen, North Hollywood, Cal., for appellant.
Arnold J. Rotman (argued), of Weiner, Rotman & Pistone, Canoga Park, Cal., for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, TRASK and CHOY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The judgment in this case for $62,419.06 plus interest in favor of Leeds against Levey is affirmed except that we conclude that Leeds' judgment against Levey should be for $53,022.93. We arrive at this adjustment because of a credit to be allowed Levey and out of reconstruction of the final computation.
We accept the trial court's computation of a charge against Levey of $117,942.01 and a charge of $6,896.12 (money received) against Leeds. (This is not a true partnership case but the same rules of accounting would be applicable here). We find the $117,942.01 figure should be reduced by a $5,000 credit for an amount paid by Levey to Perma Stamp Products. See Godbey & Sons Const. Co. v. Deane (1952) 39 Cal. 2d 429, 246 P.2d 946.
So we conclude that the "partners" accounts with the "partnership" were $112,942.01 (drawn by Levey) and $6,896.12 (drawn by Leeds) or a total of $119,838.13. Thus Leeds is entitled to one-half of the total, which is $59,919.06, less $6,896.12 already received, leaving a net of $53,022.93 due Leeds by Levey.
With the foregoing adjustments we find no reversible error in the judgment.
Remanded for modification in accordance with the foregoing. Appellant shall have one-half his costs on the appeal.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
