Guttmann v. Scannell
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court of the City of San Francisco. The following findings of the Court below, taken in connection with the facts stated in the opinions of the Court, fully explain the case: 1. That for some time past, prior to the first of January, 1856, the husband of the plaintiff was engaged in selling clothing in the city of San Francisco, and was in debt to various persons. 2. That by virtue of judgments obtained against the husband, his entire stock was sold…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of the City of San Francisco. The following findings of the Court below, taken in connection with the facts stated in the opinions of the Court, fully explain the case: 1. That for some time past, prior to the first of January, 1856, the husband of the plaintiff was engaged in selling clothing in the city of San Francisco, and was in debt to various persons. 2. That by virtue of judgments obtained against the husband, his entire stock was sold at public auction by the sheriff, about the last of December, 1855, to pay said judgments. 3. That the plaintiff, on the…
1Opinion of the Court
Terry, .J.,
delivered the opinion of the Court—Murray, C. J., concurring.
This is an action instituted by the plaintiff, who is a married woman, and sole trader under the act of 1852, to recover the value of certain goods seized by defendant, under an execution against Samuel G-uttman, the husband of plaintiff.
It appears that Samuel G-uttman was engaged in the manufacture and sale of clothing; that he became involved, and that *458his whole stock in trade was sold under execution; that shortly afterwards his wife availed herself of the provisions of the act “ to authorize married women to transact…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Youngworth v. JewellNevada Supreme Court · 1880
- Camden v. MullenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Thomas v. DesmondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883