Legal Opinion
State v. San Francisco Savings & Loan Society
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 29, 1924No. Civ. No. 2676PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The attorney-general of the state of California instituted this action in behalf of the state in pursuance of the provisions of section 1273 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as the same was amended -by the legislature of 1915 (Stats. 1915, p. 107), to have 170 different savings deposits in the defendant bank declared escheated to the state.
The notice required by the section named of the commencement of the action was duly -given to the defendants and the notice to claimants, required to be given by the county clerk by the Bank Act, as amended by the legislature of 1915 (Stats. 1915, p. 1106),…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Security Savings Bank v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Los Angeles Investment Co. v. Home Savings Bank of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- State v. Security Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Ackenhausen v. People's Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- State v. Anglo & London Paris Nat'l Bank of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1921
3Cited by8 opinions
- Badie v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Bennett v. Hibernia BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Spencer v. Hibernia BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Casady v. Modern Metal Spinning & Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1961
- Buford v. Florin Fruit Growers' Assn.California Supreme Court · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.