Lafontaine v. Greene
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Ninth District. Suit against Greene and Potter for certain personal property, to wit: a billiard table, and the fixtures, liquors, etc., of a saloon. The complaint averred, among other things, that February 13th, 1860, “ plaintiff was the owner and in possession of” the property, etc., and that defendants, by force, took the same.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Ninth District. Suit against Greene and Potter for certain personal property, to wit: a billiard table, and the fixtures, liquors, etc., of a saloon. The complaint averred, among other things, that February 13th, 1860, “ plaintiff was the owner and in possession of” the property, etc., and that defendants, by force, took the same. The answer, after denying the allegations of the complaint, averred that on the thirteenth of February, 1860, and for six months prior thereto, one Hall was the owner of the property, and that on the sixteenth day of January, 1860, Hall being…
1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.
Field, C. J. concurring.
This is an action to recover specific personal property. The prima fade title established by the defendants was sufficient to destroy the presumption of title in the plaintiff, arising from the fact of possession. The defendants did not strengthen their case by going further and showing that the plaintiff obtained the property by proceedings under a void judgment. The plaintiff did not attempt to establish a title under this judgment, but relied exclusively upon the fact of his possession at the time of the taking by the de*297fendants. The introduction of evidence showing…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lowe v. AlexanderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by1 opinion
- Town of Irvington ex rel. Warranty Building & Loan Ass'n v. DubrowPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · 1932