Siddall

Siddall v. Haight

Good Law
132 Cal. 320·1901 Cal. LEXIS 1057·64 P. 410
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 23, 1901S.F. No. 1789.California1,292 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

—Action for neglect of professional duty as attorney for plaintiff. Defendant had judgment on motion for nonsuit, from which and from the order denying his motion for a new trial plaintiff appeals.

Defendant was the attorney for plaintiff in an action against one Robert Thompson, against whom plaintiff recovered judg ment for $879.99, on May 18,1891. The lien of this judgment expired May 18, 1893. Plaintiff, testified that he employed defendant on April 1, 1893, to cause levy of execution to be made on certain real property (admittedly the only property in which Thompson had any alleged interest, and out of which alone the judgment could be collected, if at all), being a lot situated in the city of San Francisco. On April 20th, plaintiff paid defendant twenty dollars, of which ten dollars was to go on account of his fees, and ten dollars to pay sheriff’s fees for levying execution. Execution was sued out the next day, April 21st, and put in the sheriff’s hands, but for some unexplained reason was returned to defendant, and was by him again given to the sheriff, April 25th, and levied. There would have been timé to advertise the sale before the expiration of the lien, had the…

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.