Patek v. California Cotton Mills
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
McNUTT, J., pro tem.
The plaintiff, a stockholder who had paid his proportionate share of defendant corporation’s debt, brought suit against the corporation under section 322a of the Civil Code to recover the amount thereof. Demurrer to his complaint having been sustained, he stood thereon and appeals from the consequent judgment.
Article XII, section 3, of the Constitution, and section 322 of the Civil Code, established stockholders’ liability; November 4, 1930, said section 3 was repealed and at the same time section 1 of article XII was amended to give the legislature power to prescribe the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Coombes v. GetzSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Dominguez Land Corp. v. DaughertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Hooker v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Columbia Finance & Trust Co. v. Kentucky Union Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1894
- Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation District v. Wutchumna Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re RegO Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1992
- Donohue v. Highlands Underwriters InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- McCune v. First Nat. Trust & Savings Bank of Santa BarbaraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940