Turner v. Fidelity Loan Concern
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. Waldo M. York, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Appeal from a judgment against the defendants, Lord and Widaman, and from an order denying their motion for a new trial. The plaintiff and intervener are creditors of the defendant corporation, on judgments of date June 4, 1901, or later, and the suit was brought to sub ject to the payment of plaintiff’s claim the alleged subscription liability of the appellant defendants. The causes of action on which the judgments were rendered arose in the year 1901; but with regard to plaintiff’s cause of action, it appears from evidence introduced by him that part thereof was in renewal of a note of the…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Wood v. DummerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1824
- Hatch v. DanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Glenn v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1883
- Vermont Marble Co. v. Declez Granite Co.California Supreme Court · 1902
- Baines v. BabcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Estate of BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- In Re the Guardianship of CoburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Spencer v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Sargent v. Palace Cafe Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
- Wall v. Basin Mining Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1909
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.