Tognini v. Kyle
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the' Sixth Judicial District Court, Eureka County. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. I. The bill of sale given by Ratto, Nicoio & Co. to Hansen was immaterial and irrelevant, and was properly ruled out by the court on the trial. The respondent justified as sheriff, and as such he could hold the property levied on only under some writ or other process of a court of competent jurisdiction.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the' Sixth Judicial District Court, Eureka County. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. I. The bill of sale given by Ratto, Nicoio & Co. to Hansen was immaterial and irrelevant, and was properly ruled out by the court on the trial. The respondent justified as sheriff, and as such he could hold the property levied on only under some writ or other process of a court of competent jurisdiction. He could not justify under a bill of sale held by a third party. (Rhodes v. Patterson, 3 Cal. 469.) In any event the admission of the bill of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Belknap, J.:
’ This is a contest between the creditors of Ratto, Nicolo & Co. for a quantity of charcoal.
The plaintiffs claim ownership under a bill of sale executed November 3, 1879.
The defendant justified his taking under a writ of attachment against the debtors as their property, or subject as theirs to the writ on the first day of December, 1879.
Plaintiffs recovered judgment; a new trial was granted, and from this order plaintiffs have appealed.
In the determination of appeal each point relied upon by respondent, upon his motion for new trial, must be considered. If any one of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Woods v. BugbeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Hutchins v. GilchristSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850
- Fitch v. BurkSupreme Court of Vermont · 1866
- Gaudette v. TravisNevada Supreme Court · 1876
- Chaffin v. DoubCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sequeira v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Barker v. Livingston County National BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1889
- Chiatovich v. YoungNevada Supreme Court · 1942
- Hoffman v. OwensNevada Supreme Court · 1909