Diefendorff v. Hopkins
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
Upon further consideration of this case, we are satisfied with the conclusion reached in Department One on the former hearing, and with the opinion then filed, and for the reasons stated in that opinion, the judgment and order are affirmed.
The following is the opinion above referred to, rendered in Department One on the 10th of December, 1891:—
Beatty, C. J. — The defendant, as sheriff of the city and county of San Francisco, levied a writ of attachment, issued in an action commenced by certain creditors of Mrs. M. A. Rix, against her and her husband, upon the furniture of a boarding…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- McCourtney v. FortuneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Dyer v. BroganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Malone v. County of Del NorteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Robinson v. Placerville & Sacramento Valley RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by22 opinions
- Van Camp v. Van CampCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- In Re Estate of PepperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Estate of NeilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Laughlin v. LaughlinNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1944
- F.People v. MonierCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.