Legal Opinion

Portland Cracker Co. v. Murphy

California Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1900No. S.F. No. 1637PublishedCited by 1 opinion

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Charles W. Slack, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.

The complaint alleges that the defendant embezzled and fraudulently misapplied and converted to his own use the sum of twelve hundred and seventy-one dollars and ninety-four cents, which had come into his hands in the course of his employment as the agent and clerk of the plaintiff, and the complaint prays that judgment against the defendant may be had in. said sum and for costs of suit; and that the defendant be arrested and held to bail; that judgment may be entered against the person of said defendant; that he be imprisoned until the payment of said sum, and for further relief. Upon the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Payne v. ElliotCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Obersteller v. Commercial Assurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Kullmann v. GreenebaumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bond v. DeWittCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API