Martin

Martin v. Feigenberg

Good Law
1928 Cal. LEXIS 790·203 Cal. 347·264 P. 477
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 7, 1928Docket No. S.F. 12020.California1,140 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Curtis, J.

Action brought to recover possession of certain personal property of the alleged value of $1,250, and for $10,000 damages for the unlawful detention thereof. Plaintiff claimed to have been in possession of said personal property by virtue of a lease from C. H. Coddington, the owner thereof, and that defendants, on the fifteenth day of June, 1925, without plaintiff’s consent and wrongfully, entered upon the premises on which said personal property was situated and removed the same therefrom. The defendant Bercovich asserted title to said personal property through an execution sale thereof in an action wherein E. Sorenson was plaintiff and the said C. H. Coddington was defendant; that at said sale, held on June 15, 1925, the defendants Feigenberg Bros, became the purchasers of said personal property and immediately thereafter sold the same to defendant Bercovich. The court rendered judgment for defendants and plaintiff has appealed.

The writ of execution under which said property was sold is the same writ which was the subject of consideration by the district court of appeal, first district, first division, in the case of Sorenson v. Coddington, 79 Cal. App. 199 [ 249 Pac. 37 ].…

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.