Gilson Quartz Mining Co. v. Gilson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. This is the second appeal in this case. The case on the first appeal is reported in 47 Cal. 598. The principal facts are there stated. On the second trial, after the remittitur went down, the plaintiff called Raymond, one of the trustees of the plaintiff, as a witness.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. This is the second appeal in this case. The case on the first appeal is reported in 47 Cal. 598. The principal facts are there stated. On the second trial, after the remittitur went down, the plaintiff called Raymond, one of the trustees of the plaintiff, as a witness. Raymond testified that Gil-son proposed to him to pay the plaintiff two thousand dollars and obtain a purchaser of its quartz ledge and mill for five thousand dollars, if the plaintiff would satisfy its judgment against him, Gilson; that a meeting of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
Judgment and order affirmed.
Mr. Justice McEjnstry delivered the following dissenting opinion:
I dissent. The resolution of the board of trustees establishes the contract which Raymond was authorized to make on behalf of the corporation, unless, by reason of fraud practiced by Rogers in collusion with Gilson, the resolution fails to present the action of the board. The minutes were entirely under the control of the trustees, who were actually present and supervised the entry, with full knowledge of its contents; of the particulars in which it differed from the conversation between…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Just v. Idaho Canal & Improvement Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Martin v. HoweCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Lawrence v. Premier Indemnity Assurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Michaels v. Pacific Soft Water LaundryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Michaels v. Pacific Soft Water LaundryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930