Bancroft Co. v. Haslett
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Action for damages for conversion of a piano. Defendants pleaded that the piano was stored with them as warehousemen, and, after due notice to plaintiff, was sold to pay charges. They claimed that the sum of ten dollars was yet due on account of such charges, and asked judgment for that amount.
The appeal is from the judgment alone.
The action was commenced upon November 14,1892, and alleged the conversion as of July, 1892. The court found that defendants converted the piano to their own use upon February 21, 1891. The variance is immaterial, and not such as would warrant a reversal of the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Diefendorff v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Dyer v. BroganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Robarts v. HaleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Malone v. County of Del NorteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
3Cited by7 opinions
- Atwood v. Southern California Ice Co.California Court of Appeal · 1923
- Kent v. National Supply Co. of TexasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Meier v. MeierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Robinson Mining Co. v. RiepeNevada Supreme Court · 1914
- Postlethwaite v. MinorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.