Legal Opinion

Smith v. Pillsbury

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 21, 1918No. Civ. No. 2503Published

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

BEASLY, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal on the judgment-roll alone from a judgment in favor of the defendants in an action brought to recover from them, as stockholders in a corporation, their proportionate liability for an indebtedness of the corporation upon certain bonds owned by the plaintiff, the corporation having failed to meet the payments of interest thereon.

The sole question presented by the record for determination is whether or not the cause of action pleaded is barred by the provisions of section 359 of the Code of Civil Procedure, limiting to three years the time within which an…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hunt v. WardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Coulter Dry Goods Co. v. WentworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Illinois Trust & Savings Bank v. Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Equitable Trust Co. of New York v. Great Shoshone & Twin Falls Water Power Co.District Court, D. Idaho · 1915
  5. Androscoggin Railroad v. Auburn BankSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1861

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

Powered by the Exa API