Legal Opinion

People Ex Rel. Bank Commissioners v. Bank of Mendocino County

California Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1901No. S.F. No. 2354PublishedCited by 6 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, C.

Appeal from an order refusing motion of defendant to modify an injunction. The injunction affected by the motion was part of the judgment rendered March 10,1896, in a suit of the people against the defendant corporation, under section 11 of the Bank Commissioners’ Act, as amended March 26,1895. (Stats. 1895, p. 173.) The motion was made on two grounds, namely: the one, “that the judgment, ... by its terms, provides that it be operative only until the further order of the court”; the other, “that the said judgment, in so far as it restrains and enjoins . . . the . . . defendant bank,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stockton Combine Harvester & Agricultural Works v. Glen's Falls Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
  2. People v. Gold Run Ditch & Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Woffenden v. WoffendenArizona Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Sontag Chain Stores Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. People v. Bank of San Luis ObispoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Lamberton v. McCarthyIdaho Supreme Court · 1917
  4. National Brake & Electric Co. v. ChristensenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1919
  5. Peterson v. LightfootCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API