Hassell v. Bunge
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order refusing a new trial. B. Y. Sargent, Judge presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
The plaintiff, a judgment creditor of Black Tom Gold Mines Company, a corporation, brought this action to set aside a transfer of personal property made by said corporation to William H. Bunge. The complaint alleged that the transfer was made with the intent of hindering and defrauding the plaintiff and also attacked the transfer for want of the “immediate delivery, and actual and continued change of possession” required by section 3440 of the Civil Code. At the trial the plaintiff introduced no evidence to prove actual fraud, and he now relies solely upon the constructive fraud defined by…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Stevens v. IrwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Popper v. BroderickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Godchaux v. MulfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- George v. PierceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Malone v. Big Flat Gravel Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- See v. North American Accident InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Bellman v. San Francisco High School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Buckhantz v. R. G. Hamilton & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
- McCaffey C. Co., Inc. v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Hind v. Oriental Products Co., Inc.California Supreme Court · 1925
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.