Murphy v. Pacific Bank
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. M. Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.
The Pacific Bank, being then insolvent, closed its doors on June 33, 1893, and on November 3, 1893, was duly declared insolvent in a proceeding taken under section 11 of the bank commissioners’ act, and since that time has been in liquidation, and at the time this action was commenced had paid six dividends of five per cent each on the unsecured claims of its depositors and creditors, exclusive of creditors who were stockholders, and it was then expected that future dividends amounting to ten or fifteen per cent would be paid.
This action was brought in July, .1896, by the plaintiff, alleging,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Murphy v. Pacific BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by12 opinions
- Elliott v. Capital City State BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Rainey v. MichelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Merchants Nat. Bk. v. Continental Nat. Bk.California Court of Appeal · 1929
- People v. California Safe Deposit & Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913
- Morse v. Crocker National BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.