Legal Opinion
Imperial Water Co. No. 3 v. Hall
California Supreme Court
Decided October 29, 1926No. Docket No. L.A. 9271PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
Application for a writ of supersedeas. Petitioner, Maude Hall, has appealed to this court from an order of the superior court of Imperial County dissolving the respondent corporation, Imperial Water Company No. 3, and directing the distribution of its funds and property through its directors acting as trustees under the provisions of section 400 of the Civil Code. Petitioner had filed objections in writing to the application of said corporation for dissolution upon the ground that she had a valid and unsatisfied claim and demand against said corporation for a large sum of money as…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Relfe v. RundleSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Dulin v. Pacific Wood & Coal Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Martyne v. . American Union Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Tyler v. PresleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- In Re GravesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- People Ex Rel. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commission v. Town of EmeryvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Caminetti v. Guaranty Union Life Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Dabney v. PhilleoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- McCann v. Union Bank & Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
- Hulse v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.