De Leonis v. Etchepare
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from an order of the. Superior Court of Los Angeles County refusing to dissolve an attachment. Waldo M. York, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
HAYNES, C.
This appeal is from an order denying defendant’s motion to dissolve an attachment. The motion is based upon the grounds: 1. That the writ was improperly issued, because the action is equitable in its nature; 2. That the action is not founded upon either an express or implied contract for the direct payment of money; and 3. That the writ was irregularly issued, because the amount stated in the writ was not in conformity with the plaintiff’s demand as stated in the complaint.
The plaintiff is the widow of Miguel Leonis, who died in September, 1889, leaving an estate of the value of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kohler v. AgassizCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Hathaway v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Wheeler v. FarmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Kennedy v. California Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Dunn v. MackeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- McCall v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Beeson v. SchlossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Hallidie v. EngingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Willett & Burr v. AlpertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Hale Bros. v. MillikenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.