Samuels

Samuels v. Barnet

Good Law
1926 Cal. App. LEXIS 107·79 Cal. App. 529·250 P. 405
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 21, 1926Docket No. 5539.California1,253 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Nourse, J.

Plaintiff sued the defendant as sheriff of Alameda County to recover possession of a certain automobile held by the defendant under a writ of attachment. The cause was tried before the court sitting without a jury and resulted in a judgment for the defendant, from which the plaintiff has appealed on a typewritten record.

The litigation grows out of the case of Bohlen v. Alameda Investment Company, which was tried in the superior court in Alameda County on December 12, 1921. That suit was commenced to recover moneys claimed to be due Bohlen for services rendered the investment company, but in due course the company filed a cross-complaint in which it claimed that Bohlen owed it $1,143.39 as balance due on the purchase of a certain 1920 model Nash touring car. Throughout these proceedings Bohlen was represented by Mr. Samuels, the plaintiff in this case, as his attorney and legal adviser. At about 2 -.30 or 2:45 P. M. of the day of the trial the court announced that it would render judgment in favor of the company for the amount claimed to be due from Bohlen, and soon thereafter Bohlen, Samuels, his attorney, and Robinson, a witness, went to the garage where the Nash car was stored…

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.