Hurlburt v. Arthur
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.
The plaintiffs, as depositors of the Union Savings Bank of San Jose, bring this action against the defendant Miller for his proportionate liability, as a stockholder thereof, under section 322 of the Civil Code.
The case was tried in the lower court on an agreed statement of facts, from which, as far as it is pertinent to this appeal, it appears that the said bank, prior to 1896, and continuously up to January 30, 1899, was a corporation, organized under the laws of this state, and engaged in the business of banking in the city of San José, Santa Clara County, with a capital stock of one…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Burgess v. SeligmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- National Bank v. CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Pauly v. State Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Pullman v. UptonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Baines v. BabcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Blackert v. LankfordSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
- Adams v. ClarkSupreme Court of Colorado · 1906
- State v. WareSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- McColgan v. MuirlandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
- Welch v. GillelenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.