Quist v. Sandman
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of tbe Superior Court of Mendocino County and from an order denying a new trial. J. Q. White, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLori Gan, J.
This action was brought by plaintiff against A. W. Sandman, and the Hills, and others, to obtain a personal judgment against Sandman and to enforce a lien upon some 235 cords of tan bark, the property of the Hills. All the other defendants except Sandman and the Hills filed cross-complaints asking a personal judgment against Sandman and also asserting liens against the tan bark similar to those asserted by the plaintiff. The claims asserted by the plaintiff and cross-complainants were for labor in cutting and drawing' the tan bark from the trees on the premises of the Hills, under their…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Swift v. Occidental Mining & Petroleum Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- Wright v. TerrySupreme Court of Florida · 1887
- In re the Estate of DoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Mannix v. TryonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Globe Works v. WrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Carney v. SimmondsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Efron v. KalmanovitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- State ex rel. La Point v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1923
- Goodman v. Anglo-California Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1923
- Annala v. McLeodMontana Supreme Court · 1949
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.