Legal Opinion

Matteson & Williamson Manufacturing Co. v. Conley

California Supreme Court

Decided August 20, 1904No. L.A. No. 1368PublishedCited by 10 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

COOPER, C.

Appeal from a judgment for defendant, after a demurrer had been sustained to the plaintiff’s amended complaint.

The complaint states that in August, 1897, plaintiff duly recovered a judgment in the superior court of San Joaquin County against one Carlisle for the sum of $896 and costs, and thereupon execution was issued directed to the sheriff of Kern County, who served a notice of garnishment upon this defendant, whereby all goods, moneys, and credits in the hands of, or under the control of, defendant were garnished. Defendant answered in writing, admitting the fact that he had…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Adams v. HackettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
  2. Herrlich v. KaufmannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Pacific Bank v. RobinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Roberts & Co. v. LandeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
  5. Mesmer v. JenkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Smedberg v. BevilockwayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  2. Spencer v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Nordstrom v. Corona City Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Phillips v. PriceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  5. McCutcheon v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API