Doe v. Cramer
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court, ' , C. H. Sooy, H. W. Glensor, and Aitken, Glensor & Clewe, for Appellants. L. C. Pistolesi, Charles A. Shurtleff, and J. G. De Forest, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
This is an action by the plaintiffs against the defendants to recover damages for the alleged conversion by .the defendant Cramer of property belonging to the plaintiffs. Judgment was given below for the defendants and the plaintiffs appeal.
The defendant Cramer, as constable of Sausalito Township, in Marin County, received a writ of attachment issued out of the justices’ court of the city and county of San Francisco, in an action by one Catoni against the two plaintiffs, by virtue whereof on June 19,1915, he levied upon the property in controversy. Thereafter on July 1, 1915, after due…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bentinck v. MenottiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929