Legal Opinion

Tiedje v. Aluminum Taper Milling Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided May 4, 1956No. L. A. 24088PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered upon the sustaining of demurrers to his third amended complaint without leave to amend. Said amended complaint contains three counts: (1) for declaratory relief; (2) to quiet title; and (3) for voiding an illegal sale of stock. However, these counts rely upon the same facts as the basis for plaintiff’s claimed right to recover certain corporate stock and accordingly, they will be treated as one. (Stephan v. Obersmith, 48 Cal.App.2d 199, 202 [119 P.2d 388]; also Ephraim v. Metropolitan Trust Co., 28 Cal.2d 824, 833 [172 P.2d 501].) Both…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Maguire v. Hibernia Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Wennerholm v. Stanford University School of MedicineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Columbia Pictures Corp. v. DeTothCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Carter v. Seaboard Finance Co.California Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Smith v. BachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. River Garden Farms, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  2. Ting v. AT & TDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2002
  3. City Lincoln-Mercury Co. v. LindseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Kashani v. TSANN KUEN CHINA ENTERPRISE CO.California Court of Appeal · 2004
  5. M. G. Chamberlain & Co. v. SimpsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

24 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