Crowley v. Genesee Mining Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order denying the defendant a new trial, in the Twenty-first District Court, County of Plumas. Clough, J.
1Opinion of the Court
McKee, J.;
On the trial of this ca sc in the Court below, it was admitted that one M. J. Quin was the president of the corporation, defendant in this case, and tho superintendent and managing agent of its mines in Plumas County, and had full control of its business in *274that county, its principal place of business being in the city of San Francisco. It was proved that he was the princi]ial stockholder in the company. On the 11th of'’September, 1877, Quin employed the plaintiff to work in a quartz mine in Plumas County, belonging to the defendant, for the purpose of taking out what is known as “…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fleckner v. President of the Bank of the United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Bank of Middlebury v. Rutland & Washington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Wilson Sewing Machine Co. v. BoyingtonIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
3Cited by49 opinions
- City of Venice v. Short Line Beach Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Brown v. Crown Gold Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
- City Electric Street Railway Co. v. First National Exchange BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
- Woods Lumber Co. v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Kelly v. Ning Yung Benevolent Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.