Cordes
Cordes v. Harding
Opinion
lead Opinion
Lennon, J.
This is an appeal from the judgment on the judgment-roll. This case was before this court before on an appeal from the order of the trial court granting defendant’s motion for a nonsuit ( 27 Cal. App. 474 , [ 150 Pac. 650 ]).
The effect of the former decision of this court was to establish the sufficiency of the complaint, and to construe the meaning of the word “avails” to include moneys obtained from the sale of the Lindemann judgment.
Briefly, the facts are these: On the ninth day of May, 1910, defendants Harding and Monroe, through their assignee Lindemann, brought suit against the California Consolidated Mines Company for $10,193.25 for legal services, and procured an attachment upon the company’s property. At this time certain creditors of the defendant Mines Company assigned their claims to W. F. Cordes, who brought an action against the Mines Company and caused an attachment to be levied on June 20, 1910, on the same property of the company which had been previously attached in the suit brought by Lindemann. A stipulation was thereupon made, entitled in the court and causes of Lindemann and Cordes against the Mines Company by the attorneys for the respective plaintiffs…