Legal Opinion

Cunningham v. Reynolds

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 1, 1933No. Docket No. 4934PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPullen, P. J.

Petitioner herein was the owner of certain sheep which strayed upon the lands of respondent. Acting under the Estray Law, respondent thereupon seized the sheep upon his lands and has held the same pending the payment of such damages, expenses and costs as may have been incurred. A few days after the sheep were taken up, petitioner tendered to respondent the sum of $35 as payment for the damages, expenses and costs incurred, but respondent declined to accept that sum and refused to deliver up the sheep to petitioner, and proceeded to record and publish notice as required by law for the sale…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Zappettini v. BucklesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Rohrbacher v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. In re Estate of MathewsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Grant v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
  2. Sandell, Inc. v. BaileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API