Rose v. Foord
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.
— In November, 1882, the plaintiff and defendant’s intestate, N. R. Vail, made an agreement in writing, by which said Vail sold and promised to deliver to plaintiff 18,750 shares of stock in a mining corporation then about to be formed in the state of New York; the shares so to be delivered being one half of the whole number to which said Vail claimed he would be entitled on the completion of the incorporation. The purchase price of the stock — four thousand dollars — was paid by the plaintiff at the date of the contract. The corporation was subsequently formed, but the issuance of its stock…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- S. C. V. Peat Fuel Co. v. TuckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
- McKay v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Maher v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
3Cited by16 opinions
- Richard v. Credit SuisseNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Richter v. Union Land & Stock Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- Bray v. LoweryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- California Credit & Collection Corp. v. GoodinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- Mahony v. Standard Gas Engine Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.