What is the test for establishing that a partnership was dissolved?

It is clear to us that this finding should be upheld. Respondent made out his case when he showed the existence of the partnership, the sale and delivery of the water, [128 Cal.App.2d 104] charged to the partnership, and the non-payment thereof, and when appellant sought to offset this showing by proof that the partnership had been dissolved, and that plaintiff had notice thereof, this was an affirmative allegation, and the burden rested upon the appellant as the party asserting it. Torvend v. Patterson, 136 Cal.App. 120, 28 P.2d 413; Vogler v. Ingrao, 123 Cal.App.2d 341, 266 P.2d 826.

The evidence offered by appellant to prove imputed notice to the district, and that offered by respondent to prove lack of notice or knowledge would, at most, go to the credibility of the witnesses so testifying, and was a matter for the trial court to resolve. As is stated in Richards v. Plumbe, 116 Cal.App.2d 132, at pages 133-134, 253 P.2d 126, at page 127: