San Jose Savings Bank v. Sierra Lumber Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam.
Action on a promissory note, alleged to have been executed by the defendant to D. M. Delmas, and by Delmas indorsed and transferred to the plaintiff. The defense is that the note in suit was never executed by the defendant.
It is said, and such appears to be the fact from the statement, that Hayward with four others had been regularly chosen and constituted the board of directors of the defendant corporation in October, 1878, when it (the corporation) was organized, that Hayward was then an owner of stock in the corporation, and continued to be such until the 28th of May, 1879, on…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Consumers Salt Co. v. RigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Balfour-Guthrie Investment Co. v. WoodworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Bellevue Water Co. v. StockslagerIdaho Supreme Court · 1895
- Sherwood v. WallinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Kuser v. WrightSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1894
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.