Smith v. Pacific Bank

Good Law
137 Cal. 363·1902 Cal. LEXIS 564·70 P. 184
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 19, 1902S.F. Nos. 2259, 2260.California2,506 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Garoutte, J.

This action is in the nature of specific performance. At the commencement of the action the court granted an order upon the defendants to show cause why an injunction should not issue, with a restraining order in the mean time. At the hearing upon this order to show cause the court denied the motion for an injunction and dissolved its restraining order. A demurrer to the complaint was after-wards sustained, and thereupon judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants. The present appeals are from the order refusing the injunction and from the judgment. The questions before the court arise upon the sufficiency of the complaint. Many matters are raised by the demurrer, but it will only be necessary to consider a single proposition advanced by respondents, and in its consideration the following allegations of the pleading become material.

In substance, they are as follows: That upon August 1,1895, the directors of the Pacific Bank sold to J. M. McDonald, then president of said bank, one hundred and fifty bonds of a certain electric railroad; that upon the fourth day of February, 1896, one Dundon, a depositor in said bank, commenced an action against the bank, its directors, and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.