Prentice v. Zumwalt
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
THOMPSON (R. L.), J.
The plaintiff brought suit to replevin farm machinery alleged to have been unlawfully, oppressively and maliciously seized and held by the defendant. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $1550. A judgment was rendered accordingly. From this judgment the defendant has appealed.
It is -contended the judgment is not supported by the evidence; that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover possession of the property for the reason that the farm implements were lawfully taken by the defendant, and the plaintiff failed to tender the necessary amount to release…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Clark v. McClurgCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Wilkinson v. SinghCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Bogue v. RoethCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
3Cited by6 opinions
- Williams v. BoneIdaho Supreme Court · 1953
- Gregory v. PadillaAlaska Supreme Court · 1963
- Holcomb v. Long Beach Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1933
- Perlick v. Pacific Discount Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Kennedy v. Rosecrans Gardens, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1952
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.