Whitehead v. Valley View Consol. Gold Min. Co.
| Decision Date | 11 May 1914 |
| Docket Number | 3927 |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
| Parties | WHITEHEAD v. VALLEY VIEW CONSOL. GOLD MINING CO. et al. |
Error to District Court, Pueblo County; J.E. Rizer, Judge
Action by Mrs. W.O. Whitehead against the Valley View Consolidated Gold Mining Company and others. From a judgment of nonsuit complainant brings error. Reversed and remanded.
Joseph Dye, of Pueblo, for plaintiff in error.
M.G Saunders and E.F. Chambers, both of Pueblo, for defendants in error.
Plaintiff brought her action in the district court against the defendant company, and certain officers of the company in their official capacity, alleging that she was the owner of a certain certificate of mining stock calling for 10,000 shares of the capital stock of the defendant corporation; that she delivered the same to W.A. Stewart, as president of the company, for the sole purpose of having the same transferred to her upon the books of said company; that the said Stewart as president of said corporation, received the said certificate of stock for the purpose aforesaid; that she made demand upon Stewart, and each of the other individual defendants, officers of the company, for the certificate to be issued in lieu of the original certificate delivered by her to Stewart, as aforesaid; and that he and they failed and refused to deliver the same to her. The evidence shows conclusively that the certificate of stock was delivered to Stewart by plaintiff, upon his solicitation and request, and upon his representation that plaintiff ought to have the said certificate of stock taken up and new stock issued to her in lieu thereof; that he was the president of the company. It also shows that Stewart caused the same to be canceled by the secretary of the company, and in lieu of it various certificates of stock, representing the same amount in the aggregate as the original certificate, were issued to Stewart, the secretary, and other officers of the company who were made defendants. Plaintiff prays that the officers be compelled to transfer on the books of the company 10,000 shares of its capital stock to her in lieu of the certificate which she intrusted to Stewart for that purpose, and for her dividends, which the evidence shows were paid upon the stock after the delivery of the certificates to Stewart. The answer properly puts in issue the averments of the complaint. On the trial, at the close of plaintiff's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Buchholz v. Union Pac. R. Co.
...of a proposition, an attack by motion will be unavailing. Rimmer v. Wilson, 42 Colo. 180, 93 P. 1110; Whitehead v. Valley View Consol, Gold Min. Co., 26 Colo.App. 114, 141 P. 138. See Serv-Us Chain Stores, Inc., v. Arden Realty & Inv. Co., 106 Colo. 369, 105 P.2d 850. A variant of the rule ......
-
Interstate Const. Co. v. Lakeview Canal Co.
...as to deposits and accounts furnished to the Canal Company; motion for nonsuit admits the truth of plaintiff's evidence, Whitehead v. Co., 26 Colo.App. 114, 141 P. 138. Brome Hyde for Appellee. The property belongs to Fertile Valley Canal Company, which Company is not a party to this appeal......
-
Mayer Oil Co. v. Schnepf
... ... legitimately deducible therefrom. Whitehead v. Valley ... View Consol. Gold Min. Co., 26 ... ...
-
Rule 41 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS.
...Civil Procedure, the question must have been submitted to the jury for determination. Whitehead v. Valley View Consol. Gold Mining Co., 26 Colo. App. 114, 141 P. 138 (1914); City of Longmont v. Swearingen, 81 Colo. 246, 254 P. 1000 (1927); Arps v. City & County of Denver, 82 Colo. 189, 257 ......