Ruskin v. Cheney
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.
Plaintiff claims possession of the personal property here involved—an air compressor, a 100 foot air hose, and two jackhammers—under a chattel mortgage admittedly executed by the owner of the described property and recorded at 10:16 A. M. on October 2,1934; and' said plaintiff is manifestly entitled to the relief he seeks unless prevented by the intervention of some prior or superior right. The only right asserted to be so prior or superior is that which defendant Roberts, as receiver of B. Hayman Co., Inc., claims to have acquired by attachment proceedings in the superior court case of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hallidie v. EngingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Ponsonby v. Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
- Crawford v. NewellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
- Brainard v. RogersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Brusie v. GatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Kee v. BeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Noland v. NolandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941