Dunlap

Dunlap v. Chatom

Good Law
1923 Cal. App. LEXIS 8·60 Cal. App. 560·213 P. 282
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 1923Civ. No. 2526.California2,473 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hart, J.

This is an action for damages in the sum of $6,000 for the alleged conversion of 500 tons of barley

The complaint is cast in the usual form of an action in conversion, and alleges as follows:

The defendants A. G-. Chatom, Thomas H. Chatom, and Corcoran Mill & Warehouse filed separate answers, specifically denying the averments of the complaint.

The cause was tried by the court, sitting without a jury.

A default was entered against the defendant T. W. Nor-cross and the action dismissed as to the defendant, J. C. Walsh. As to the other defendants, A. G. and Thomas H. Chatom and Corcoran Mill & Warehouse, the findings followed the denials of the answers and the decision, therefore, was in their favor. Judgment for said defendants was accordingly entered. The appeal is by the plaintiff from said judgment.

The important contention of the plaintiff is that the findings are without sufficient probative support, but an examination of the evidence as it is presented here has convinced us that it is the contention and not the findings which the record does not support.

The following facts are extracted from the evidence as it was produced before the trial court: For some time prior to…

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.