Legal Opinion
Vannucci v. Pedrini
California Supreme Court
Decided December 30, 1932No. Docket No. S.F. 14546PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.
The question presented on this appeal is the legal effect of a by-law of a corporation which was assented to by all the stockholders and of which the party dealing with the stockholders had notice and knowledge. The defendants Plenry Matteucci, Oreste Matteucci, Vincent Matteucci, Evelyn Matteucci and Ida Bianehini were stockholders of the Roma Macaroni Factory, a corporation organized under the laws of this state, and while such stockholders said corporation adopted, with the acquiescence and express consent of said defendants, a by-law reading as follows:
“No transfer shall be valid or shall…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Baumohl v. GoldsteinNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1924
- Jennings v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- People's Home Savings Bank v. SadlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
- Sterling Loan & Investment Co. v. LitelSupreme Court of Colorado · 1924
- Bloomingdale v. BloomingdaleNew York Supreme Court · 1919
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Eccles v. Peoples Bank of Lakewood VillageSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Palmer v. ChamberlinCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1951
- Coast Bank v. MinderhoutCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Yeng Sue Chow v. Levi Strauss & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1975
- Groves v. PrickettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.