Legal Opinion

Quigley v. Gorham

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1855PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, San Francisco County.

1Opinion of the CourtHeydenfeldt, J.

Murray, C. J., concurred.

The words of a statute must be interpreted according to their common acceptation. In the Act which exempts certain articles from execution, the term “ wagon” is intended to mean a common vehicle for the transportation of goods, wares, and merchandize of all descriptions. A hackney coach used for the conveyance of passengers is a different article, and does not come within the equity or literal meaning of the Act.

Judgment reversed, and canse remanded;

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. In Re HermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Cone v. LewisTexas Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Perrin v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  4. Equitable Life Ins. v. GleasonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
  5. In Re GundelfingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

1 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