Thomas v. Birch
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Clyde Bishop, H. C. Head, Williams & Rutan, and Trippet, Chapman & Biby, for Appellant. George H. Woodruff, Clyde C. Shoemaker, and Hunsaker & Britt, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
A demurrer to the second amended complaint having been sustained, and the plaintiff declining to amend further, judgment was entered in favor of the defendants. The plaintiff appeals.
The complaint in question alleges that during 1910 and 1911 the plaintiff was the owner of 650 shares of the capital stock of Menges Oil Company, a corporation having an outstanding capital stock" of ninety thousand shares. The defendant Birch was a director of said corporation, and its president and general manager. As such officer, he employed the defendant Good as superintendent, and Birch and Good were in…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Baird v. . Mayor, Etc., of City of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1884
- McDonough v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Thompson v. LibbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Fitch v. BunchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Holland v. McCarthyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Simpson v. GreenTexas Commission of Appeals · 1921
- Kelley v. UpshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Steiner v. ThextonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- Waggoner v. ZundelowitzTexas Commission of Appeals · 1921
- Blue v. ConnerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.