Irwin

This is an action to recover from the' defendant .the sum of three thousand dollars, and interest thereon, the payment of which is alleged to have been secured by a chattel mortgage.

The facts stated in the complaint are, in substance, as follows: On the twenty-third day of November, 1889, *120 one Robert L. Gouts executed to the plaintiff a mortgage on a crop of wheat, barley, and oats, then being planted on land in San Diego County, and to be harvested in the year 1890. The mortgage was properly verified, acknowledged, and recorded, and was given to secure payment of the mortgagor’s promissory note for sixteen hundred dollars and interest, and such further advances as the mortgagee might make to the mortgagor, not exceeding fourteen hundred dollars. Further advances were made to the amount of fourteen hundred dollars, thus making the whole debt secured three thousand dollars, no part of which, except a portion of the interest, had been paid. On the thirteenth day of August, 1890, the defendant, as sheriff of the county of San Diego, wrongfully and unlawfully levied upon the mortgaged crop a writ of attachment issued in favor of one Cave J. Gouts against the mortgagor, and…

I concur in the judgment, and in the reasoning of the foregoing opinion.

I think, however, the decision in this case cannot he reconciled with the cases of Wood v. Franks, 56 Cal. 217 , and Sherman v. Finch, 71 Cal. 68 . In my judgment, those cases were wrongly decided, and I have no hesitancy in concurring in this judgment, which, in effect, overrules them.