Hamer v. Hathaway
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, County of Alameda. Hathaway, on the 19th day of June, 1863, commenced an action against Hamer and one Millard to recover possession of one hundred tons of hay; and having given the necessary bonds, and his attorney having made the required order, the Sheriff took the hay from Millard and delivered it to Hathaway. Hathaway did not prosecute his action, but on the 22d of February, 1865, dismissed it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, County of Alameda. Hathaway, on the 19th day of June, 1863, commenced an action against Hamer and one Millard to recover possession of one hundred tons of hay; and having given the necessary bonds, and his attorney having made the required order, the Sheriff took the hay from Millard and delivered it to Hathaway. Hathaway did not prosecute his action, but on the 22d of February, 1865, dismissed it. Hathaway converted the hay to Ms own use, and Hamer brought this action to recover its value. The maximum value of the hay per ton, between…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Rhodes, J.:
Action for the unlawful taking and conversion of a lot of hay. This hay was in Alameda County when taken by the defendant, but was afterwards transported to San Francisco.
The plaintiff’s position is that he is entitled to recover the highest market value of the hay between the time of taldng and the trial; and that as it was taken to San Francisco, he is entitled to the highest market value at that place. The defendant’s position is that the plaintiff is entitled only to its market value at the time and place it was taken. The Court followed neither rule, but in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commercial Bank v. KortrightCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1839
- Goulet v. . AsselerNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Clark & Clark v. PinneyNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Cortelyou v. LansingNew York Supreme Court · 1796
- Douglass v. KraftCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Cox v. McLaughlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Co. v. Peninsular Land, Transportation & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1891
- Page v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- City of Chickasha v. HollingsworthSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- State ex rel. Robertson v. HopeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.