Legal Opinion

Riggle v. Jackson

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 10, 1931No. Docket No. 7735PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.

Plaintiff sued for damages for the alleged wrongful attachments of personal property used by him in drilling an oil-well. The defendants are the sheriff, his bondsman, and the attaching plaintiff. The cause was tried without a jury and resulted in a judgment for all defendants. The plaintiff appeals on a bill of exceptions.

Behr and White entered into a contract with plaintiff wherein the latter agreed to drill a well for oil and the former agreed to furnish plaintiff a derrick, engine and other necessary equipment to be used in the work. As a part of the agreement Behr and White undertook to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Drinkwater v. . DinsmoreNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Montgomery & Eufaula Railway Co. v. MalletteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
  3. Nashville, Chattanooga & Saint Louis Railway Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  4. Maher v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Hurd v. BarnhartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Henderson v. Security Nat. BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  2. Henderson v. Security National BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API