Hunt

Hunt v. Ward

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 725·99 Cal. 612·34 P. 335
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 6, 1893No. 19152California1,699 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

Action to recover of defendant Ward his proportionate share of the alleged indebtedness of a corporation in which he was a stockholder. Judgment went for plaintiff, from which, and from an order denying a new trial, said defendant appeals. Appellant contends, among other things, that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and that the action is barred by section 359 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It is averred in the complaint that on February 20,1888, a certain corporation called the “ Exchange Block Company” made and delivered to respondent its promissory note for $7,500, payable one year after date with twelve per cent per annum interest, and also executed to respondent a mortgage on certain corporate property to secure said note; that afterwards respondent foreclosed said mortgage, and that after the sale of the mortgaged premises there was a deficiency of $3,291.50, for which judgment was docketed against said corporation on January 9,1891, and that the same is wholly unsatisfied; and that during the times mentioned appellant owned such a number of shares of the corporate stock as would make his proportionate share of said deficiency…

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.