Getchell

Fairbanks, Morse & Co. v. Getchell

Good Law
13 Cal. App. 458·1910 Cal. App. LEXIS 162·110 P. 331
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 23, 1910Civ. No. 780.California1,729 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion to discharge an attachment.

On May 6, 1910, an opinion was filed herein whereby the ruling of the trial court in denying defendant’s motion to discharge an attachment was reversed. In that opinion the court overlooked section 558, Code of Civil Procedure, as it was amended in 1909 (Stats. 1909, p. 253), and in the absence of anything to the contrary being said by respondent, whose attorney it appears did not deem the case of sufficient importance to warrant him in filing points and authorities, or otherwise to offer any suggestions touching the points involved, it accepted appellant’s contention based upon Winters v. Pearson, 72 Cal. 553 , [ 14 Pac. 304 ], and Tibbet v. Tom Sue et al., 122 Cal. 208 , [ 54 Pac. 741 ], to the effect that an affidavit for attachment is not subject to amendment in this state. Our attention having been directed to the inadvertence, an order was made on May 19th whereby the judgment heretofore rendered was set aside and vacated and a rehearing ordered for the purpose of correcting the erroneous statement contained in the former opinion.

Defendant’s motion for the discharge of the attachment…

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.