Legal Opinion

McDonald v. Cutter

California Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1898No. S. F. No. 888PublishedCited by 4 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. D. J. Murphy, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. •

1Opinion of the CourtVan Fleet, J.

The controversy in this action relates to the ownership of certain bonds of the city of Placerville and of a judgment against the city on those bonds. The plaintiff claims title under a sale made by the assignee in insolvency of one Meyers. The respondent claims title under a transfer by Meyers to her testator, Robinson, made seven days prior to the filing of the petition in insolvency. Plaintiff claims: 1. That the transfer by *45Meyers was not absolute, but merely by way of security; and 2. ' That it was made in fraud of the insolvency law. As to the first point, the court found that the…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bobier v. HornSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  2. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. v. GumbyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1900
  3. McDonald v. Mayor of City of PlacervilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Sealand Investment Corp. v. ShirleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API