Swim v. Wilson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtDe Haven, J.
The plaintiff was the owner of one hundred shares of stock of a mining corporation, issued to one H. B. Parsons, trustee, and properly indorsed by him. Tl>is stock was stolen from plaintiff by an employee in his office, and delivered for sale to the defendant, who was engaged in the business of buying and selling stocks on commission. At the time of placing *128the stock in defendant’s possession, the thief represented himself as its owner, and the defendant, relying upon this representation, in good faith, and without any notice that the stock was stolen, sold the same in the usual course of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Barstow v. Savage Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1883
- Koch v. Branch & CrookesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- Rogers v. HuieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1852
- Kimball v. BillingsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1867
- Rogers v. HuieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1851
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Bancroft-Whitney Co. v. McHughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- A & M RECORDS, INC. v. HeilmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Lone Ranger Television, Inc. v. Program Radio Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Kohn v. Sacramento Electric, Gas Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Lusitanian-American Development Co. v. Seaboard Dairy Credit Corp.California Supreme Court · 1934
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.