Prudential Petroleum Co. v. Peck
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
ARCHBALD, J., pro tem.
A demurrer to plaintiff’s third amended complaint for the recovery of an unpaid stock subscription was sustained without leave to amend, and plaintiff has appealed from the judgment of dismissal thereafter entered.
The complaint contains two counts, the first of which, after alleging the corporate capacity of plaintiff, avers in substance that one Arthur R. Peck died on or about the 18th of September, 1927, leaving an estate in Los Angeles County, and leaving as his sole residuary legatees and devisees the defendants, “who heretofore have been duly and regularly appointed…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Haddad v. McDowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Gruwell v. SeyboltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Visalia & Tulare Railroad v. HydeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Meilink v. GianelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Berkeley Hillside Properties Co. v. KellyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
3Cited by3 opinions
- Overton v. WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- Shive v. BarrowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Palpar, Inc. v. ThayerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947