Goodwin & Co. v. Buckley
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion to discharge an attachment, in the Twenty-third District Court, City and County of San Francisco.
1Opinion of the Court
Department No. 2, Morrison, C. J.:
This is an appeal from an order of the late District Court of the Twenty-third Judicial District, made on the 3rd day of September, 1878, denying defendants’ motion to discharge an attachment issued in the above entitled action.
In the transcript is found a stipulation that a complaint in proper form, and sufficient to justify the issuance of an attachment, was duly filed in the action. It also appears from the transcript that an affidavit for an attachment was filed in the case, and that thereupon a writ of attachment was duly issued on the 6th day of July,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hemstreet v. WassumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
3Cited by7 opinions
- Ex Parte SohnckeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Central Oregon Irrigation District v. Deschutes CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1942
- County of San Luis Obispo v. FeltsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Betyar v. PierceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- County of Mariposa v. County of MaderaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.