Arena

Upon the original trial of this case in the superior court judgment was rendered for defendant. Thereupon an appeal was prosecuted by the plaintiff herein to the supreme court (reported in 194 Cal. 195 [ 228 Pac. 441 ]), and the judgment of the trial court was reversed, with direction to enter judgment for plaintiff. A petition for rehearing was denied, but the court directed that inasmuch as the Bank of Italy had been a coactor with its co-defendant, the sheriff, in procuring an unlawful release of attachment of the property in question and the delivery thereof to itself, the bank was liable for whatever damages plaintiff had sustained by reason of the conversion of the property.

Thereupon the trial court entered judgment for plaintiff in accordance with the directions of the supreme court and also gave its judgment for the amount of damages sustained by plaintiff by reason of the conversion mentioned. The facts in issue are fully set forth in the opinion of the supreme court written by Mr. Justice Richards and need not be repeated.

Appellants rely upon three grounds for reversal: 1. Insufficiency of the' evidence to support the findings; 2. Excessive amount of the judgment; 3.…