O'Brien

O'Brien v. Greenebaum

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 1179·92 Cal. 104·28 P. 214
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 27, 1891No. 13877California741 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haven, J.

The right of plaintiff to any part of the relief demanded in the complaint depends entirely upon the validity of the composition agreement referred to therein, and which the plaintiff asks to have adjudged fraudulent and void. If that agreement is to stand, then plaintiff, as a party thereto, is bound by its terms, and his claim against defendants Greenebaum and Straus, for their alleged conversion of his money and stocks, must be satisfied in the manner thereby provided. The plaintiff alleges that this agreement is fraudulent and void as to him, because certain of the creditors who signed it received fraudulent preferences for the purpose of inducing them to do so, and that such facts were concealed from plaintiff, and were a fraud upon his rights, and his signature was, by reason of such concealment, fraudulently obtained.

The court below found as facts that for the purpose of securing the assent of certain creditors to said agreement, such creditors were, with the knowledge of Greenebaum and Straus, given secret advantages and benefits superior to those held by a majority of the creditors. But the court also found that on or about the 9th of November, 1886, Moses Greenebaum, a…

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.