Legal Opinion

Hammond v. Starr

California Supreme Court

Decided July 2, 1889No. 11623PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Gibson, C.

— This was an action against defendants as sureties upon an undertaking to obtain the release of an attachment levied in another suit, and was tried before the court without a jury, and resulted in a judgment for plaintiff, from which judgment defendants appeal, and instead of moving for a new trial, bring up the evidence, rulings, and exceptions in a bill of exceptions.

In the action wherein the attachment proceedings occurred, it appears the original complaint therein was entitled John Hammond v. Ætna Iron Works, a Corporation, and the affidavit and undertaking for an attachment…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hathaway v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  2. Porter v. PicoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  3. McCreery v. EverdingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Hale Bros. v. MillikenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Force v. HartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Hoffman v. Pacific Coast Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1918
  4. Commissioners v. Aiken Canning Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  5. Ross v. Gold Ridge Mining Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API