McElhaney v. W. E. Moyer & Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
BURNELL, J., pro tem.
Respondent brought this action to recover the value of certain shares of stock which she claimed had been secured from her by fraud on the part of the appellant corporation. Appellant’s chief contention is that the evidence does not support the finding of fraud. We have examined the transcript with care, and while the evidence is conflicting there is abundant evidence to support the court’s findings in this regard.
It appears from the testimony of the respondent and of various other witnesses that prior to January, 1924, respondent owned two units of stock in a corporation…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Calmon v. SarrailleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Meyer v. HaasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Togni v. TaminelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- Hardison v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- King v. Globe Grain & Milling Co.California Court of Appeal · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- CIT Corporation v. PanacCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Tyner v. AxtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Griffith Co. v. HofuesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Patterson v. Clifford F. Reid, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1933
- Long v. HarrisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.