Opinion

Turner v. Fidelity Loan Concern

  • 2 Cal. App. 122
  • 83 P. 62
  • 1905 Cal. App. LEXIS 121
Court
California Court of Appeal
Filed
Oct 31, 1905
Status
Published
Author
Gray
On the bench
Gray, Smith
Cited by
13 cases
Authority
More cited than 44.0%

The opinion

GRAY, P. J.

I concur specially in the reversal of the judgment and order. I do not think there is any analogy, however, between this case and the case of a creditor seeking to collect his debt from the debtor of his debtor by attachment. I am strongly of the opinion that the creditors may sue the stockholders of a bankrupt corporation directly and without any effort to compel an assessment by the corporation, and believe that the liability of the stockholders to such creditors .is several as well as joint, and that it is not necessary to join all the stockholders in such a suit.

(Walter

v.

Merced Academy Assn.,

126 Cal. 582 , [ 59 Pac. 136 ].)

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on December 29, 1905, and the following opinion was then rendered:

The COURT.

In denying such petition, it is proper to say that such portions of the opinion of said court of appeal as are devoted to the discussion of such questions as, it is said in the opinion, “must be determined with a view to the further proceedings in the case,” are concurred in by only two of the justices of said court of appeal, and, consequently, do not constitute “the law of the case” for further proceedings.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.