Atkins v. Gamble
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
The legal propositions involved in this case are of great practical importance, and, in arriving at a satisfactory solution of them, we have been very much aided by the able and exhaustive briefs of the respective counsel.
In 1863 the Antelope mine, in Esmeralda District, was owned by an incorporated company, established under the laws of the State, and having its principal place of business at San Francisco. The defendant was President of the company, and the plaintiff was Superintendent of the mine. The interests of the respective stockholders in the company were…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hardenbergh v. BaconCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Hawley v. BrumagimCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by24 opinions
- Payne v. ElliotCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Bell v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- MacDermot v. HayesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Bastanchury v. Times-Mirror Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
- Corey v. StruveCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.