Laumeister

Quan Wo Chung & Co. v. Laumeister

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 693·83 Cal. 384·23 P. 320
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 5, 1890No. 13651California1,014 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beatty, J.

his is a proceeding by mandamus upon the following case: —

In an action to recover possession of certain real property situate in San Francisco, in which one Lee Chuck was plaintiff and the above-named petitioners were defendants, the superior court rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, whereupon a writ of restitution *385 was issued, under which petitioners were ejected from the demanded premises, and said Lee Chuck placed in possession. The petitioners afterward moved the superior court to restore them to possession, on the ground that the writ of restitution had been wrongfully executed by the sheriff after stay of proceedings granted. 'This motion was resisted by Lee Chuck and denied by the superior court, but on appeal to this court the order was reversed, “ with directions to the superior court to enter an order commanding the sheriff to restore the possession of the property in controversy to the defendants.” (Lee v. Quan Wo Chung & Co., 81 Cal. 222 .)

The remittitur upon this judgment was filed in the superior court December 21, 1889, and an order was thereafter made in conformity to the mandate of this court.

But when the sheriff, the respondent here, was…

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.