Stilphen v. Ware

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

3,366

Attorney(S)

Powell, for Appellant, argued that a judgment obtained against a corporation is a debt and a liability within the meaning of the statute, and that the stockholderswho were such at the time the services were rendered and the judgment recovered are individually liable, and cited Hittell's Digest, Sec. 16; Larrabee v. Baldwin, 35 Cal. 155; Slee v. Bloom, 20 Johns. 680; Belmont v. Coleman, 21 N.Y. 97; 32 How. Pr. 35; Milliken v. Whitehouse, 49 Me. 527; and 14 Iowa 235. This action was commenced within six months after the liability accrued under the judgment, and is not barred. The liability of stockholders is fixed by the Constitution and cannot be abrogated by the Legislature. (Constitution, Article IV, Sec. 36.) Jarboe & Harrison, for Respondent.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

JOHN H. STILPHEN v. WILLIAM WARE et al.

Actions against stockholders of a corporation to enforce a liability must be brought within three years after the liability was created. (Stats. 1850, p. 346.) The liability in this case was created by the services rendered more than three years prior to the commencement of the action. The judgment sued upon was only evidence of the liability. (Wyman v. Mitchell, 1 Cow. 321; 35 Cal. 168; Davidson v. Rankin, 34 Cal. 503; Young v. Rosenbaum, 39 Cal. 654.)

OPINION By the Court:

It is conceded that irrespective of the judgment rendered against the corporation itself, the cause of action stated in the complaint is barred by limitation, and if this be so, it is clear that the judgment did not of itself operate to prolong the time in which an action might be brought against the defendants as stockholders of the corporation. (Davidson v. Rankin, 34 Cal. 503; Larrabee v. Baldwin, 35 Cal. 168: Young v. Rosenbaum, 39 Cal. 646.)

Judgment affirmed.

JOHN H. STILPHEN v. WILLIAM WARE et al.

Comments