Cline

Cline v. Smith

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 910·96 Cal. App. 703·274 P. 763
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 12, 1929Docket No. 3576.California537 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finch, J.

This is one of the actions growing out of the contract and transactions set forth in Campbell v. Smith (No. 3574), ante, p. 689 [ 274 Pac. 758 ], to which reference is hereby made for a more complete statement of facts. The plaintiff herein is the assignee and agent of the Falls Rubber Company. He prosecutes this action to recover possession of automobile tires and tubes of the alleged value of $8,000. He took possession of the property under a claim and delivery bond before the trial. Verdict and judgment went for the defendant for the return of the property or its value in the sum of $8,000. The plaintiff has appealed from the judgment.

This action and the Campbell case and another action between the parties hereto were tried together before the same jury. The facts involved in this action are largely the same as those in the Campbell case. Some of the tires and tubes, for the recovery of which this action was brought, had been pledged by defendant as security for money borrowed by him and others had been distributed by him among retail dealers. The defendant claimed ownership of a part of this property by reason of the trade acceptances for $18,000 which he gave the company,…

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.