Legal Opinion
Bentinck v. Menotti
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 7, 1929No. Docket No. 6675PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NEEDHAM, J., pro tem.
This is a companion case to that of Bentinck v. Menotti, ante, p. 409 [275 Pac. 849]. The facts in the instant case are the same, except that this is a ease in claim and delivery for the recovery of the same automobile, the defendant Menotti being sued in his individual capacity, and H. S. Bell is added as a defendant, Bell being the keeper and owner of the garage in which the automobile in question was stored while under attachment by Constable Menotti.
The evidence shows the automobile was placed in the garage of Bell by the constable on the twenty-sixth day of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Perrin v. McMannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Robinett v. ConnollyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Newell v. McDonaldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Bentinck v. MenottiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
3Cited by4 opinions
- Allen v. ClarkDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1938
- Bayham v. FieldsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1969
- Roy Pemberton v. James A. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
- In re Midwest Livestock Commission Co.District Court, D. Nevada · 1967