Ray v. California Home Building Loan Co.

Annotate this Case

[Civ. No. 9890. First Appellate District, Division One. May 31, 1935.]

MARTIN E. RAY et al., Petitioners, v. CALIFORNIA HOME BUILDING LOAN COMPANY, etc., et al., Respondents.

COUNSEL

Ellis, Lyman & Steindorf for Petitioners.

No appearance for Respondents.

OPINION

The Court.

[1] Ordinarily mandamus will not lie to compel a transfer of corporate stock; a suit in equity is the [7 Cal. App. 2d 276] proper remedy. There is nothing contained in the petition to show that this remedy is inadequate. (Spangenberg v. Western Heavy Hardware & Iron Co., 166 Cal. 284 [135 P. 1127].) The petition is denied.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.