Legal Opinion

Clark v. Hamilton Diamond Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 1930No. Docket No. L.A. 11916PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WASTE, C. J.—

The plaintiff brought an action in claim and delivery for recovery of the possession of a diamond ring alleged to be of the value of five hundred dollars. Judgment went for the plaintiff and the defendant Cohen has appealed, contending that he is a Iona fide purchaser of the ring without, knowledge of defect of title, and is entitled to a reversal of the judgment.

The appeal is on the judgment-roll alone, and the findings show that plaintiff sold the ring to Harry Justice, who “ fraudulently gave a worthless check in payment therefor.” Justice traded the ring to one Dye as payment…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Levi v. BoothCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1882
  2. South San Francisco Packing & Provision Co. v. JacobsenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Pacific Acceptance Corp. v. Bank of ItalyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Weyerhaeuser Timber Co. v. First National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Allen Dudley & Co. v. First National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Handley Motor Co. v. WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. Handley Motor Co. v. WoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. Parker v. First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

9 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