Legal Opinion

Black v. Hilliker

California Supreme Court

Decided October 3, 1900No. Sac. No. 660PublishedCited by 15 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yolo County and from an order denying a new trial. A. J. Buckles, Judge presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.

Action of claim and delivery. The plaintiff brought this action to recover from the defendant the possession of certain personal property or its value. Upon the commencement of the action, under his direction, the property, was taken by the sheriff from the possession of the defendant, and within five days thereafter and before its delivery to the plaintiff, the sheriff, upon the execution to him by the defendant of a proper undertaking therefor, returned the property to her. In her answer to the complaint defendant denied its allegations and alleged ownership in herself of the property and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Asevado v. OrrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Lambert v. HaskellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Mitchell v. HawleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Curtiss v. BachmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Murphy v. MulgrewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
  2. LeFave v. DimondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Erreca v. MeyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Hornaday v. HornadayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  5. Gay v. TorranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

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

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

Powered by the Exa API