Legal Opinion

Ventura Co. v. Craemer

California Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 1938No. L. A. No. 16580PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.

This proceeding in mandamus was brought to compel respondent State Building and Loan Commissioner to pay liquidating dividends allegedly due to the petitioner, as well as claims of all other creditors similarly situated.

On July 30, 1931, the commissioner took possession of the business, property, and assets of the United Building and Loan Association for the purpose of liquidating its affairs. At that time Emma H. Ingram was the owner of investment certificates issued by the association and was also the owner of *409twenty-one-shares of its guarantee stock. On March 25, 1932, she filed a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rainey v. MichelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Williams v. CarverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Wood v. HamaguchiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Kaysser v. McNaughtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Drapeau v. Fullerton Securities Corp.California Supreme Court · 1937

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McCombs v. CraemerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  2. McCombs v. CraemerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Sachse v. CraemerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Sachse v. CraemerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API