BELDEN v. CALIFORNIA FIREPROOF STORAGE CO (1934)

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1, California.

BELDEN v. CALIFORNIA FIREPROOF STORAGE CO. et al.

Civ. 8001.

Decided: September 18, 1934

Clarke & Bowker and Faries, Williamson & Musick, all of Los Angeles, for appellant. Louis F. Labarere and John A. Cronin, both of Los Angeles, for respondent.

Appellant evidently predicates its appeal upon the fact that it believed the complaint to be one for rescission. Counsel did not set forth the complaint in their brief, but sufficient of it is set forth in respondent's reply brief to show that the cause of action is one for damages suffered by reason of the sale of stock to plaintiff by fraudulent representations, because in law the stock was void and issued without a permit. It is not a case of rescission of the contract of sale in any sense of the word.

As to the other questions raised by appellant, we think it enough to say that there was sufficient evidence to justify the findings of the trial court and that the findings were ample to justify the judgment.

The judgment is affirmed.

YORK, Justice.

We concur: CONREY, P. J.; HOUSER, J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network