Moyle

Moyle v. Landers

Good Law
1889 Cal. LEXIS 1093·3 Cal. Unrep. 113·21 P. 1133
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1889No. 11,906California968 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The complaint contains two counts. The defendants demurred to the whole complaint, and “to the second alleged cause of action set out in the plaintiffs’ complaint,” which we shall consider as a demurrer to the second count of the complaint.

The demurrer was sustained, and plaintiffs declining to amend, final judgment was given and entered in favor of defendants. From this judgment plaintiffs have appealed.

The object of the action is to procure relief from certain alleged fraudulent misappropriations of the funds and property of the corporation defendant the Andes Silver Mining Company by some of its directors. The defendants contend *115 that the complaint is defective in this: That the action should have been brought by the corporation as plaintiff, and not by the present plaintiffs, who are stockholders of the corporation. The general rule undoubtedly is that an action of this character must be brought in the name of the corporation. The recovery, if any, belongs to the corporation, and must go into its coffers. But there are exceptions to this rule. One is where a demand is made on the corporation to bring such action, and it refuses to bring it. This demand must be…

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.