Chilstrom v. Eppinger
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San ' Luis Obispo County. E. P. Unangst, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
The action is by the assignee of the judgment to recover on the undertakings given on appeal and given to stay proceedings. A judgment was rendered in the justice’s court in favor of Morgenson, plaintiff, against Grabow, defendant. An appeal was taken, and the undertakings here sued upon were given to support it. Before determination of the appeal Morgenson assigned his judgment to P. 0. Ohilstrom, plaintiff in this action. He made no assignment of Ms rights upon the undertaMngs. After the assignment of the judgment the appeal was dismissed, and Ohilstrom instituted this action in which he…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Moses v. ThorneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
- Dray v. MayerOregon Supreme Court · 1874
3Cited by5 opinions
- Feinberg v. StearnsSupreme Court of Florida · 1908
- Armour Company v. LambdinSupreme Court of Florida · 1944
- Heisen v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Hentig v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Hillman v. GriffinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899