Legal Opinion
Fleishhacker v. Blum
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 7, 1940No. 9021PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HEALY, Circuit Judge.
Appellees,1 stockholders of the Anglo-California National Bank of San Francisco (herein called the Bank), sued to recover for the Bank profits or bonuses alleged to have been received by appellant Herbert Fleishhacker, its president, as consideration for his causing the Bank to make certain loans to be used in a business venture in which he was interested. Appellants Thompson, Klinker, and Palo Alto Stock Farms, Inc., were nominees of Fleish-hacker in holding stock evidencing his interest, issued by a corporation organized to carry on the enterprise. The suit being a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hawes v. OaklandSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Dodge v. WoolseySupreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Lady Washington Consolidated Co. v. WoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Victor Oil Co. v. DrumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Corbus v. Alaska Treadwell Gold Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1903
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Federal Savings & Loan Insurance v. MolinaroCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Michelsen v. PenneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Burnham Chemical Co. v. Borax Consolidated, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1948
- In The Matter Of Lawrence B. SeidmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Clara Goldenberg, Formerly Clara Littman v. Bache and Company, Bache and Company v. Clara Goldenberg, Formerly Clara LittmanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.