Legal Opinion
Bellus v. Peters
California Supreme Court
Decided March 12, 1913No. L.A. No. 2797PublishedCited by 11 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order refusing a new trial. N. P. Conrey, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
“The action was one by Bellus in his own behalf and as assignee of John W. Kemp to recover the price and value of a certain 40,000 shares of stock in a corporation, alleged in the complaint to be the property of plaintiff and by said defendant converted to bis own use. The court found the allegations of the complaint to be true and the value of the stock to be $10,000 and rendered judgment accordingly against defendant Peters. From this judgment, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals.
“The allegations of the complaint, in substance, are these: That in January, 1909, one…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Quock Ting v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- People v. MilnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- County of Sonoma v. StofenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. Mock Yick GarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Sterling v. ColeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
3Cited by11 opinions
- Haigler v. DonnellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Randolph v. HuntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Estate of AdesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Dierks v. NewsomCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Morehouse v. Taubman Co.California Court of Appeal · 1970
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.