Marble v. Hasberg, 8 Cal.2d 770
[L. A. No. 15988. In Bank. February 26, 1937.]
JOHN M. MARBLE et al., Appellants, v. WILLIAM HASBERG, Respondent.
JOHN M. MARBLE et al., Appellants, v. LOU ANGER et al., Respondents.
Overton, Lyman & Plumb, Irving H. Prince, Chalmers L. McGaughey and Roscoe R. Hess for Appellants.
Loeb, Walker & Loeb, Herman F. Selvin, Guy Richards Crump, Mark S. Feiler, Roy W. Colegate, Frank P. Doherty and William R. Gallagher for Respondents.
OPINION OF THE COURT
 The questions involved in the appeal in these consolidated cases are the same as those raised in Dietzel v. Anger, L. A. No. 15987 (ante, p. 373 [65 PaCal.2d 803]), this day decided. The trial court in the instant case reached the conclusion that the plaintiffs, representing the holders of bonds of a corporation in default, had no right to sue defendants, stockholders of the issuing corporation, where rights of action under or because of the bonds were vested in a trustee which had not been asked to sue. For the reasons stated in Dietzel v. Anger, supra, the lower court's decision was correct.
The judgment is affirmed.
[End of Volume 8 Cal.2d]
|Fri, 02/26/1937||8 Cal.2d 770||Review - Civil Appeal||Opinion issued |
|1||JOHN M. MARBLE et al., Appellants, v. WILLIAM HASBERG (Respondent)|
|2||WILLIAM HASBERG (Respondent)|
|Feb 26 1937||Opinion: Affirmed|