Hulen v. Stuart
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWaste, J.
The plaintiff, as executrix of her deceased husband’s estate, brought this action to recover from defendant the sum of $2,000 and interest, alleged to be due by reason of an unfulfilled agreement to repurchase certain corporation stock sold by the defendant to the decedent in his lifetime.
As a cause of action, the plaintiff alleged that on or about the fifteenth day of September, 1915, William Yancey Rulen, the decedent, purchased from defendant twenty shares of the capital stock of the Santa Cruz Fruit and Olive Canning Company, and paid therefor the sum of $2,000; that at the time of the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Sturm v. BokerSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Lomita Land and Water Co. v. RobinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Krasky v. WollpertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Schulte v. Boulevard Gardens Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
- Bartlett v. Odd FelLows' Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Steelduct Co. v. Henger-Seltzer Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
- Capital National Bank v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Norton v. PuterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Wade v. Markwell & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1953
- South Bay Irrigation District v. California-American Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1976
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.