# Los Angeles County Pioneer Society v. Historical Society

> California Supreme Court · May 5, 1953 · 40 Cal. 2d 852

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9854313

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re LOS ANGELES COUNTY PIONEER SOCIETY, a Corporation, in Process of Voluntary Dissolution. LOS ANGELES COUNTY PIONEER SOCIETY Et Al., Appellants, v. HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (A Corporation) Et Al., Respondents; THE PEOPLE Et Al., Interveners and Respondents
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 5, 1953
- **Citations:** 40 Cal. 2d 852; 257 P.2d 1; 1953 Cal. LEXIS 241
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Schauer
- **Judges:** Carter, Schauer
- **Cited by:** 72 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9854313

## Opinion text

SCHAUER, J.
I concur generally in the reasoning and conclusion of Justice Carter. Particularly do I find no justification whatsoever for refusing to permit Pioneer to take the corrective action which it could not know it should take until this court had ruled that it could not rely on the prior final judgment or its charter from the state.
Pioneer, by its articles of incorporation and the laws of California was not a charitable corporation; it never intended or pretended to be a charitable corporation; it paid taxes as a noneharitable corporation; it was adjudicated not to be a charitable corporation. With that background it instituted a proceeding for dissolution as it had a right to do. Its every act shows the good faith of the fine citizens composing it. Now this court rules that it is a charitable corporation and in the same judgment punishes Pioneer for instituting the lawful dissolution proceeding by stripping it of its assets and giving them to another; it refuses even to permit Pioneer, despite the authorization of the statute, to discontinue the dissolution proceeding and to carry out the trust which the court adjudges to exist.
Such action in my view is contrary to fact, to law, to justice, to reason and to constitutional guarantees.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9854313. Public record. Not legal advice.