From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rousseau v. Hall

Supreme Court of California
Apr 1, 1880
55 Cal. 164 (Cal. 1880)

Opinion

         Department Two

         Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, and from an order refusing a new trial, in the Eighteenth District Court, County of San Bernardino. McNealy, J.

         Actions against Hall and others, composing the firm of the San Gorgonio Fluming Co., to foreclose a mechanic's lien on a flume. The defendants commenced the construction of the flume October 18th, 1876, and the plaintiffs performed labor thereon from October 19th, 1876, to July, 1877. On the 13th day of February, 1877, the San Gorgonio Fluming Co. was incorporated. The corporation answered, and judgment was rendered against it. The appeal was taken by the corporation.

         COUNSEL:

         J. D. Boyer, and Bicknell & White, for Appellants.

          Talbott & Harris, for Respondents.


         OPINION          By the Court:

         The decree and order denying the motion for a new trial reversed, so far as concerns the San Gorgonio Fluming Company, a corporation. The findings and decree seem to be based upon the fact that the company is a corporation, and as such is indebted to the plaintiffs, and its property is decreed to be sold. The corporation has never been made a party to the action, and has not had a day in court.


Summaries of

Rousseau v. Hall

Supreme Court of California
Apr 1, 1880
55 Cal. 164 (Cal. 1880)
Case details for

Rousseau v. Hall

Case Details

Full title:ROUSSEAU v. HALL et al.; REYNOLDS v. HALL et al.; BOLEN v. THE SAN…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Apr 1, 1880

Citations

55 Cal. 164 (Cal. 1880)

Citing Cases

Reno S. Works v. Stevenson

The complaint bases plaintiff's right to recover in any event, either upon its legal or equitable cause of…

Hunter v. Hunter

The court could not allow counsel fees to the defendant as alimony in an action to annul a marriage, and the…