Harris v. Taylor
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Seventeenth District. John Harris, the plaintiff, on the twenty-ninth October, 1859, filed his complaint against defendants for a partition of certain ditch property, alleging that he was the owner of certain undivided interests therein.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Seventeenth District. John Harris, the plaintiff, on the twenty-ninth October, 1859, filed his complaint against defendants for a partition of certain ditch property, alleging that he was the owner of certain undivided interests therein. In due course of law, on the nineteenth July, 1859, judgment of partition was rendered, and the Court, finding that Harris was the.: owner of the interests, as alleged, decreed that his proportion of the proceeds of the sale, which was ordered, should be paid to him. October 11th, 1859, Galloway, who was not a party to the partition suit,…
1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.
Field, C. J. concurring.
This is an action for the partition of certain property, and an account. The Court ordered the property to be sold, and the proceeds distributed. After the sale, one James E. Galloway filed a petition in the case, claiming so much of the proceeds as had been ordered to be paid to the plaintiff. The petitioner is a creditor of the plaintiff’s vendor, and the proceeding is simply an attempt to defeat the conveyance to the plaintiff, on the ground of fraud. For this purpose, the facts stated in the petition are wholly insufficient. There is no allegation of insolvency,…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Spreckels v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Hager v. ShindlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Ziska v. ZiskaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Burdsall v. WaggonerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1878
- Rockford Watch Co. v. RumpfWashington Supreme Court · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.