Case Name: BANK OF CALIFORNIA, NATIONAL ASS'N, v. CRADDOCK-TERRY CO.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1936-05-04
Citations: 83 F.2d 819
Docket Number: No. 7467
Parties: BANK OF CALIFORNIA, NATIONAL ASS’N, v. CRADDOCK-TERRY CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 83
Pages: 819–819

Head Matter:
BANK OF CALIFORNIA, NATIONAL ASS’N, v. CRADDOCK-TERRY CO.
No. 7467.
Circuit Court of Appeals., Ninth Circuit.
May 4, 1936.
F. D. Madison, Marshall P. Madison, and Gerald S. Levin, all of San Francisco, Cal. (Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro, of San Francisco, Cal., of counsel), for appellant.
F. F. Thomas, Jr., John T. Pigott, and Burnham Enersen, all of San Francisco, Cal. (McCutchen, Olney, Mannon & Greene, of San Francisco, Cal., of counsel), for appellee.
Before WILBUR, DENMAN, and MATHEWS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
WILBUR, Circuit Judge.
This action was brought to recover upon the stockholders' liability imposed by section 322 of the California Civil Code. The trial court held that the repeal of section 3 of article 12 of the California Constitution on November 4, 1930, repealed by implication section 322 of the California Civil Code. The sole question presented by this appeal is whether or not the repeal of section 322 was thus effected.
We have delayed the decision in this case owing to the fact that the question involved is one peculiarly of California constitutional and statutory law upon which it is our duty to follow the decisions of the state court. Since the submission of the case the Supreme Court of the state of California in Kaysser v. McNaughton, 57 P.(2d) 927, and in Rainey v. Michel, 57 P.(2d) 932, decided April 30, 1936, has held that section 322 was not repealed by the constitutional amendment in question. Upon the authority of these cases the judgment is reversed.
Reversed.