Parkinson Brothers Co. v. Figel
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
The action was brought by plaintiff to have the rights of the several defendants determined to certain money held by plaintiff. It is alleged that plaintiff (herein referred to as Parkinson Company) and defendant Henry Cowell Lime & Cement Company (herein referred to-as the Cement Company) are corporations; that the Cement Company has commenced an action in the superior court of Santa Clara County against defendant Fred H. Figel and in said action a writ of attachment has been issued and served by the sheriff of said county upon this plaintiff, with a notice that all goods, etc., in the hands…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Heath v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Roberts v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Lyden v. Spohn-Patrick Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Saurderson v. BroadwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Morrell v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1896
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Platte County State Bank v. FrantzWyoming Supreme Court · 1925
- Miller v. KeeganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Hasenjeager v. VothCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Sullivan v. VeraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Charles R. Parkinson Co. v. FigelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.