Anderson v. Byrnes
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. D. J. Murphy, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.
In plaintiff’s original brief he says: “This is an action qui tam by a stockholder (a common informer) to recover the statutory penalty from the directors of a domestic mining corporation for failure to make or post monthly balance sheets, et cetera, required by act approved April 23, 1880.” By that statute it is declared that a stockholder may recover the sum of one thousand dollars as liquidated damages from the directors of mining corporations for failure upon their part to comply with certain of its provisions. Subsequent to the filing of plaintiff’s original brief, and while the appeal…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wiles v. . SuydamNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Robinson v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
- Gregory v. German BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1877
- Denver & R. G. R'y Co. v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
- Ball v. TolmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by20 opinions
- Penziner v. West American Finance Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Wilke & Holzheiser, Inc. v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- National Carloading Corp. v. Phoenix-El Paso Express, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1943
- People v. DurbinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- People v. Bank of San Luis ObispoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.