Legal Opinion

Copelin v. Berlin Dye Works & Laundry Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 1914No. L.A. No. 3659PublishedCited by 21 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.

This is an appeal from the order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.

The action was one for nine hundred dollars, the value of a pair of earrings alleged to have been received by the defendant and converted by it to its own use. Defendant is engaged in the business of cleaning and dyeing clothes. Mrs. Copelin, one of the plaintiffs, sent a suit of clothes belonging to her husband, the other plaintiff; to the establishment of the defendant, for the purpose of having the garments cleaned. The suit was delivered to the driver of one of defendant’s wagons. Next morning, Mrs. Copelin…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Walsh v. HuntCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Merchants National Bank v. GuilmartinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
  3. Stephenson v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Chamberlain v. Southern California Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Glover v. BurbidgeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1887

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Alma W. v. Oakland Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  2. H.S. Crocker Co., Inc. v. McFaddinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  3. Webber v. Bank of TracyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. Yamaguchi v. HarnsmutCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  5. Young v. First Nat. BankTennessee Supreme Court · 1924

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