McEldowney

McEldowney v. Madden

Good Law
124 Cal. 108·1899 Cal. LEXIS 951·56 P. 783
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 24, 1899Sac. No. 475California420 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gray, J.

This is an appeal hy intervenor from a judgment in favor of plaintiff and from an order denying appellant the right to intervene. The respondents have filed no brief.

The plaintiff brought suit for four hundred dollars, money had and received, and caused a writ of attachment to b.e issued and levied on the property of defendant; the defendant demurred, and while such demurrer was pending the appellant ■asked leave to file a complaint in intervention, in which it is alleged that appellant had begun an attachment suit against the defendant Madden on a bond given hy him to the state of California, and subsequently to the levy of attachment herein, had attached the same property levied on hy plaintiff in this ease; facts are then stated showing that plaintiff has no cause of action *109 against the defendant, and that the writ of attachment herein is null and void; that the property attached is insufficient to pay intervenor’s claim against the defendant, and that- defendant has not sufficient property to pay both intervenor and plaintiff. The prayer of intervenor’s complaint is, that it 'be adjudged that defendant is not indebted to plaintiff; that the attachment herein is null and…

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.