Legal Opinion

Blood v. Marcuse

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1869PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Second District, Plumas • County. On the 8th day of August, the Whitney Quartz Mining Company, a corporation, held a note against the Crescent Quartz Mining Company, also a corporation, for the sum of twelve thousand dollars. An action was commenced on said note, attachment issued, and all the corporate property of the Crescent Company attached.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the Second District, Plumas • County. On the 8th day of August, the Whitney Quartz Mining Company, a corporation, held a note against the Crescent Quartz Mining Company, also a corporation, for the sum of twelve thousand dollars. An action was commenced on said note, attachment issued, and all the corporate property of the Crescent Company attached. The defendants, M. Marcuse and Glazier & Bro., also held claims against the Crescent Company, and commenced actions thereon and attached subsequent to the attachment of the Whitney Company. On the 24th day of…

1Opinion of the CourtRhodes, J.

The note of the Crescent Company was assigned by the Secretary of the Whitney Company in his official capacity. The assignment purports to be made by the Whitney Company, but it was not executed by the corporation. It is not, therefore, a corporate act, unless the Secretary was not only authorized to make the assignment, but also to make it in his official capacity. The Secretary is not vested with such authority by virtue of his office, and no delegated authority from the corporation is shown; and under the authority of Gashwiler v. Willis, (33 Cal. 16), and the cases therein cited, the…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Palo Alto Mutual Building & Loan Ass'n v. First National BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  2. City of Chicago v. SteinIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Buena Vista Oil Co. v. Park Bk. of L. A.California Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. In re Annin & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1938
  5. Asher v. SuttonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1884

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API