Benson

Benson v. Olender

Good Law
1926 Cal. App. LEXIS 302·77 Cal. App. 287·246 P. 345
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 29, 1926Docket No. 5373.California1,489 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Langdon, J.

The defendants appeal from a judgment against them as sureties on a replevin bond. The following facts appear from the findings of the court:

On December 12, 1922', Sam Caplan and I. H. Caplan commenced an action in the superior court of the ’ state of California, in and for the county of Fresno, against one S. S. Smith. Said action was in replevin, the plaintiffs therein claiming to be entitled to .the possession of certain personal property then in the possession of defendant. A writ of replevin issued and the goods were seized by the sheriff and delivered to the plaintiffs. The defendant Smith filed an answer in said action, demanding the return of the property or its value, alleged to be $4,000. The plaintiffs in said action filed a replevin bond signed by Olender and Samuels, defendants herein, which bond contained the following clause: “Now therefore, we, the undersigned, residents of the said County, in consideration of the premises and of the delivery of the said property to the said plaintiffs do hereby undertake and acknowledge to the effect that we are jointly and severally bound in the sum of Eight Thousand Dollars, being double the value of said property as stated in…

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.