Legal Opinion

Yule v. Bishop

California Supreme Court

Decided August 13, 1900No. S. F. No. 1364PublishedCited by 30 opinions

APPEAL from Superior Court, Alameda County. Action by John Yule against Charles R. Bishop and others. From an order granting plaintiff a new trial defendants, appeal. Reversed.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

This is an action by plaintiff to enforce the statutory liability of the stockholders for a debt of the corporation. Judgment passed for defendants. Plaintiff *514moved for and obtained an order granting him a new trial and from that order defendants appeal. The complaint, so far as is necessary for the consideration of the questions here presented, shows that the Consolidated Piedmont Cable Company, a corporation, borrowed from the Oakland Bank of Savings, upon its corporate note, the sum of $10,000. Before delivery of the note, Mrs. Phebe Blair placed her name upon the back thereof as an…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Orem v. WrightsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1879
  2. Chipman v. Morill & WebsterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  3. Redington v. CornwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Moore v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Smith v. RumseyMichigan Supreme Court · 1876

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Erkenbrecher v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Coulter Dry Goods Co. v. WentworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Chambers v. FarnhamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Bailes v. KeckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Wills v. WoolnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913

25 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