The Edward Barron Estate Co. v. the Woodruff Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Charles S. Wheeler, J. C. McKinstry, Lilienthal, McKinstry & Raymond, and J. F. Bowie, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This is an action to recover damages for fraud and deceit. To the complaint a demurrer, general and special,, was interposed. The demurrer was sustained. Plaintiff declined to amend and from the judgment which followed prosecutes this appeal. The sufficiency of the complaint to pass a general demurrer is the matter to which the chief arguments upon either side have been addressed.
The allegations and charges in the complaint may be thus epitomized: Plaintiff is a family corporation organized to manage the properties of Edward Barron, deceased. Its stockholders are the heirs of the .deceased,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Russell v. Clark's ExecutorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1812
- Simar v. . CanadayNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- People v. . PeckensNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Spreckels v. GorrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Schmidt v. MesmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by83 opinions
- Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
- Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Bainbridge v. StonerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Sime v. MaloufCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Rutherford v. Rideout BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.