Legal Opinion

Dandini v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 15, 1940No. Civ. 11374PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.

Petitioners seek a writ of certiorari to review an order adjudging them guilty of contempt for their failure to comply with the terms of a writ of mandate.

Lillian Dandini, who is a director, but not a shareholder, of the Remillard-Dandini Co., procured a writ of mandate to compel the petitioners herein, as officers and directors of that company, to permit her to inspect the corporation’s books. Mrs. Dandini appeared at the offices of the company with an attorney at law and an accountant whom she directed to make an examination and take an accounting of the ledger of the corporation and…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hartman v. HollingsworthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  2. State v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1944
  3. Tract No. 7260 Assn. v. ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API