Legal Opinion

Michaelson v. Fish

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 3, 1905No. 22PublishedCited by 5 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Shasta County and from an order denying a new trial. Edward Sweeney, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcLAUGHLIN, J.

This action was brought by plaintiff to recover possession of eleven casks of brandy, with damages for withholding possession of the same. The defendant, answering the complaint, denied that plaintiff owned, or was entitled to the possession of the brandy, or had at any time demanded possession of the same. As a special defense, and as ground for affirmative relief, he alleged: That he was employed by one Annie Kline Rickert as a distiller to make and manufacture brandy, at an agreed wage of seventy-five dollars per month; that he was to receive one hundred and twenty-five dollars for certain…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Tebbe v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  2. American Type Founders' Co. v. PackerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Jones v. Goldtree Bros. Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Henry v. MerguireCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  5. M'Intyre v. CarverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. La Point v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Annala v. McLeodMontana Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Calkins v. HowardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
  4. Walbridge v. CousinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
  5. Reeves & Co. v. RussellNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API