Legal Opinion

Lowe v. Ozmun

California Supreme Court

Decided September 11, 1902No. L.A. No. 1053PublishedCited by 21 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Lynn Helm, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFABLAND, J.

This action was brought for an alleged conversion by defendant’s testator of certain described personal property—namely, bonds and coupons. The complaint shows that the action was commenced within three years, but not within two years, after the alleged conversion; and the court below sustained the demurrer to the complaint upon the ground that the action was barred by subdivision one of section 339 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides that “an action upon a contract, obligation, or liability, not founded upon an instrument in writing” must be brought “within two years.” There is no…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lattin v. GilletteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Daggett v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Piller v. S. Pac. R.R.California Supreme Court · 1877
  4. McCusker v. WalkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Raynor v. MintzerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Bell v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Bastanchury v. Times-Mirror Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
  3. Central Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Italiani v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Automobile Insurance Co. v. Union Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1948

16 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