Legal Opinion

Mary Pickford Co. v. Bayly Bros., Inc.

California Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1939No. L. A. 16384PublishedCited by 90 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

Bayly Brothers, Inc., Harold Bayly, Roy D. Bayly, Edwards & Wildey Company, Suburban Estates, Inc., and California Trust Company have appealed from a judgment by which they were held liable for the amount paid by the plaintiffs for a beneficial interest under a certain declaration of trust which" was issued and sold without a permit from the commissioner of corporations. The plaintiffs also are dissatisfied with the judgment, and upon their appeal claim interest in a larger sum than was allowed.

The controversy arose out of a real estate subdivision project initiated by Bayly…

2Cases cited57 opinions

  1. Glock v. Howard & Wilson Colony Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Green v. . DaviesNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
  3. Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Revert v. HesseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Pollak v. StauntonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by90 opinions

  1. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Ralston Purina Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
  2. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Aced v. Hobbs-Sesack Plumbing Co.California Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Bowden v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  5. Main v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1977

85 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