Wilson v. Spring Hill Quartz-Mining Co.
10 Cal. 445
Opinion
Terry, C. J., concurring.
These cases only differ from the case of Rowe v. The Table Mountain Water Company in this, that here the complaint is against a trading company, and the service of the summons is returned executed upon the company, by service upon one Pendleton, one of the partners and associates. The principle applicable to the two classes of cases is not materially different.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Wilson v. Spring Hill Quartz-Mining Co., 10 Cal. 445 (Cal. 1858).
10 Cal. 445 (Wilson v. Spring Hill Quartz-Mining Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Eclipse Fuel Engineering Co. v. Superior Court
307 P.2d 739 (California Court of Appeal, 1957)
Michels v. Stork
17 N.W. 833 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1883)