Wood v. Gordon
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
HANSON, J. pro tem.
In this shareholders’ derivative suit instituted by preferred shareholders the ultimate question presented is whether the trial court erred in holding, upon the facts adduced, that section 834 of the Corporations Code was applicable and as a consequence that the plaintiffs were under a duty to deposit security for litigation expenses in favor of the defendants I. M. Weinstein, Harold Larson, and Robert Gordon.
The statute in question expressly provides that if a party upon a hearing pursuant to a proper motion establishes either (1) that there is no reasonable probability…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
3Cited by11 opinions
- Beyerbach v. Juno Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1954
- Efron v. KalmanovitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Burt v. Irvine Co.California Court of Appeal · 1965
- Mueller v. MacBanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Woodman v. AckermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.