Forbes v. McDonald
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order granting defendants anew trial, in the Fourth District Court, City and County of San- Francisco. Morrison, J. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Department No. 2, Myrick, J.:
Peter Owens was indebted to A. Forbes by reason of transactions in the stock of the Mahogany Gold and Silver Mining Company, in the sum oí $2,102.50, for which Forbes held 150 shares of the stock as collateral, then worth about $4,200. Forbes was a trustee of the company. The management of the company was not harmonious, two trustees having views opposed to the other two, Forbes being the fifth. The defendants, McDonald and T. J. Owens, Who were dealing in stock of the corporation, desired to have Forbes resign as trustee, that they might have some friend put in…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Cohen v. Kite Hill Community Assn.California Court of Appeal · 1983
- Glass v. Basin & Bay State Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1904
- Brooks v. CooperSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1893
- Sauerhering v. RuepingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Gage v. FisherNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.