Legal Opinion

Meherin v. San Francisco Produce Exchange

California Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1897No. S. F. No. 465PublishedCited by 17 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. James M. Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.

The plaintiffs constitute a partnership under the firm name of Meherin Brothers, and as such were a member of the defendant, which is a corporation very similar in its character and purposes to the other numerous produce exchanges throughout the country, described by Messrs. Bisbe and Simonds in their treatise on the “ Law of the Produce Exchange.” On November 12, 1884, the defendant, by a unanimous vote of its governing body, suspended the plaintiffs from membership privileges, until certain decisions recited in the resolution of suspension as having been made by the arbitration committee…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Prescott v. GonserSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872
  2. Baker v. Johnson CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
  3. Bills v. Silver King Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Chapman v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Bogart v. George K. Porter Co.California Supreme Court · 1924
  2. County of San Luis Obispo v. GageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Vickrey v. MaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Dennis v. BintCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Dean v. Iowa-Des Moines National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1938

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API