Beal v. United Properties Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. M. Seawell, Judge. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtNourse, J.
This action, like that of Beal v. Smith et al., ante, p. 271, [189 Pac. 341], involves the transactions growing out of the organization of the United Properties Company in December, 1910. The demurrers of the several defendants to the amended complaint were all sustained without leave to amend, and judgment entered in their favor. The appeal is taken from this judgment and the parties have stipulated that the briefs filed in both actions may be considered on each appeal.
The amended complaint alleges that on the sixth day of March, 1911, plaintiff was the owner of first mortgage bonds of the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Abbott v. the 76 Land and Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Klein v. MarkarianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Wineburgh v. GayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Los Angeles Immigration & Cooperative Ass'n v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Beckwith v. SheldonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Filmservice Laboratories, Inc. v. Harvey Bernhard Enterprises Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1989
- Otis Oil & Gas Corporation v. MaierWyoming Supreme Court · 1955
- Chandler v. HollingsworthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Snyder v. United Properties Co.California Court of Appeal · 1921
- Kogan v. BergmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.