Faymonville v. McCollough

California Supreme Court

Faymonville v. McCollough

59 Cal. 285

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 15, 1881

DocketNo. 7,289

StatusPublished

This text of 59 Cal. 285 (Faymonville v. McCollough) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Faymonville v. McCollough, 59 Cal. 285 (Cal. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court:

There was no demurrer to the complaint on the ground that there was a misjoinder of parties defendant, or that causes of action were improperly united. These objections to the complaint were, therefore, waived. The general demurrer ought not to have been sustained. The obligation of stockholders to pay their respective proportions of debts of the corporation, incurred while they are stockholders, is direct and primary (Constitution, Art. xi, § 3; C. C., § 322; M. H. C. & M. Co. v. Woodbury, 14 Cal. 266; Prince v. Lynch, 38 id. 528).

Judgment reversed arid cause remanded, with direction to the Court below to overrule the demurrer.

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

The Court:

There was no demurrer to the complaint on the ground that there was a misjoinder of parties defendant, or that causes of action were improperly united. These objections to the complaint were, therefore, waived. The general demurrer ought not to have been sustained. The obligation of stockholders to pay their respective proportions of debts of the corporation, incurred while they are stockholders, is direct and primary (Constitution, Art. xi, § 3; C. C., § 322; M. H. C. & M. Co. v. Woodbury, 14 Cal. 266; Prince v. Lynch, 38 id. 528).

Judgment reversed arid cause remanded, with direction to the Court below to overrule the demurrer.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 Cal. 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/faymonville-v-mccollough-cal-1881.