Ward

Ward v. McKinsey

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 13·98 Cal. App. 108·276 P. 403
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 3, 1929Docket No. 6699.California1,099 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Landis, J.

This is an appeal by plaintiff from an order of the superior court dissolving a temporary restraining order.

Briefly stated, it is averred in the amended complaint “that defendant, Ed. McKinsey, as plaintiff in an action No. 104,448 in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, was given judgment herein and one H. E. Putnam for the sum of $645.34 on December 1, 1922”; that “said H. E. Putnam as plaintiff in another action in said court, action No. 103,337, was given judgment against said Ed. McKinsey for the sum of $1200 on March 15, 1923; that it was agreed between all the parties to said actions that no execution was ever to be issued against either of the defendants in action No. 104,448 and that the judgment in action No. 104,448 would, be offset by the judgment rendered in action No. 103,337. That on October 1, 1925, said H. E. Putnam, for a valuable consideration, sold and transferred all his interest in said judgment in action No. 104,448 to plaintiff who is now, the owner thereof;

“That in violation of said agreement, said Ed. MeKinsey caused an execution to be issued and levied upon certain real property belonging to plaintiff and after due proceeding had, the Sheriff of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.