Shea

Shea v. Johnson

Good Law
101 Cal. 455·1894 Cal. LEXIS 1057·35 P. 1023
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 1894No. 18232California809 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

A demurrer to the complaint was sustained, and plaintiffs electing not to amend, judgment was entered for defendants. Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment.

It was averred in the complaint that defendant Johnson brought an action against defendant Zetz to recover money alleged to be due from the latter to the former, and in said action caused certain described personal property of Zetz to be attached; and that afterwards plaintiffs brought an action against said Zetz and caused the same property to be attached. The purpose of the present action is to have it decreed that the attachment of plaintiffs, though subsequent in time, is a prior lien to the attachment of Johnson.

There is no averment that the money sued for by Johnson was not justly due and owing to him from Zetz, or that the alleged cause of action in Johnson v Zetz, was in any way false or fraudulent; nor is there- *457 any averment that the attachment proceedings in that action were on their face in any way invalid. It is averred, however, that the statement in the affidavit of attachment that “the claim sued upon had not been secured by any mortgage or lien upon real or personal property, or any pledge of personal…

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.