Hillman

Hillman v. Griffin

Good Law
1899 Cal. LEXIS 1181·6 Cal. Unrep. 354·59 P. 194
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 27, 1899Sac. No. 342California1,539 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Dyke, J.

This action is in the nature of replevin. The plaintiff claims the property through purchase from Mrs. Emma H. Briggs, owner of the Glorietta Vineyard ranch in Yolo county. It consists of a large quantity of boxes and trays used on a fruit ranch, together with the tools and implements of various kinds necessary for the cultivation of such ranch, all embraced in the bill of sale dated the 12th of January, 1895, for the consideration, as stated by the plaintiff, of $6,000; also two mules and one mare, of the value of $500, not embraced in said bill of sale but purchased by the plaintiff from the said Mrs. Briggs in 1893. The defendant justifies the taking of the property in question as sheriff of Yolo county under proceedings in attachment in the suit of the *355 West Valley Lumber Company, a corporation, against said Emma H. Briggs. The property, at the time of the seizure and taking by the defendant as sheriff, was on the said Glorietta Vineyard ranch. The affidavit in the attachment proceedings states that the action is brought upon a certain promissory note for the principal sum of $3,160, dated June 30, 1893, due eight months after date, with interest at the rate of ten per…

rehearing Opinion

ON REHEARING.

December 28, 1899.

59 Pac. 696 .

On petition for a rehearing of this cause, it is ordered that a rehearing be denied, but the judgment of the department is hereby set aside, and the following judgment given in place thereof: The judgment and order of the superior court denying a new trial are reversed and the cause remanded.

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.