Emery Consolidated Mining Co. v. Tweedy

California Court of Appeal

Emery Consolidated Mining Co. v. Tweedy

82 P.2d 209, 28 Cal. App. 2d 767, 1938 Cal. App. LEXIS 626

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedAugust 22, 1938

DocketCiv. No. 11831

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 82 P.2d 209 (Emery Consolidated Mining Co. v. Tweedy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Emery Consolidated Mining Co. v. Tweedy, 82 P.2d 209, 28 Cal. App. 2d 767, 1938 Cal. App. LEXIS 626 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

WOOD, J.

Plaintiff seeks to recover from defendants upon their statutory liability as directors of a corporation under the laws of the state of Montana. Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment entered after the trial court sustained the defendants’ demurrer without leave to amend.

The facts in the present action are the same as the facts in Interstate Lumber Co. v. Tweedy, this day decided (ante, p. 208 [82 Pac. (2d) 208]), except that the judgment entered was for mining royalties upon shipments of ore made between August 5 and November 1, 1935. The principles of law involved are identical with those involved in the case to which reference has just been made. For the reasons stated in the opinion in that case the judgment is affirmed.

Crail, P. J., and McComb, J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WOOD, J.

Plaintiff seeks to recover from defendants upon their statutory liability as directors of a corporation under the laws of the state of Montana. Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment entered after the trial court sustained the defendants’ demurrer without leave to amend.

The facts in the present action are the same as the facts in Interstate Lumber Co. v. Tweedy, this day decided (ante, p. 208 [82 Pac. (2d) 208]), except that the judgment entered was for mining royalties upon shipments of ore made between August 5 and November 1, 1935. The principles of law involved are identical with those involved in the case to which reference has just been made. For the reasons stated in the opinion in that case the judgment is affirmed.

Crail, P. J., and McComb, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 P.2d 209, 28 Cal. App. 2d 767, 1938 Cal. App. LEXIS 626, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emery-consolidated-mining-co-v-tweedy-calctapp-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack