Legal Opinion
Ball v. Tolman
California Supreme Court
Decided January 18, 1902No. S.F. No. 1963PublishedCited by 19 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
Appeal from an order made after the judgment in the superior court had been affirmed by this court on appeal.
The action was to recover a penalty for a violation of the provisions of the act of April 23, 1880, entitled “An act amendatory of an act entitled an act for the better protection of stockholders in corporations,” etc., approved March 30, 1874. (Stats. 1880, p; 134.) The judgment for plaintiff was entered in the trial court on January 9,1897. Pending motion for a new trial, the penal provisions of the act of 1880 were repealed by act of February 26, 1897. (Stats. 1897, p.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- First Natl. Bank of San Luis Obispo v. HendersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Anderson v. ByrnesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Ball v. TolmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by19 opinions
- People v. Bank of San Luis ObispoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Martello v. Superior Court of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- City of Sonora v. CurtinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Pennell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- People v. One 1953 Buick 2-DoorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.