Legal Opinion
People v. One Ford V8 Tudor Sedan
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 18, 1936No. Civ. 9864PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKnight, J.
This proceeding was instituted by the state under the authority of the State Narcotic Act for the forfeiture of the automobile above described, which the state seized while it was being used admittedly for the unlawful purpose of transporting narcotics. At the time of the seizure the automobile was subject to a vendor’s conditional sales contract upon which there was an unpaid balance; aid pursuant to the provisions of section 15 (e) of said act the ¡finance company holding the sales contract filed an answer ashing for the release of the automobile. Upon trial, judgment was entered in its…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- J. W. Goldsmith, Jr.-Grant Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Dobbins's Distillery v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Various Items of Personal Property v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Van Oster v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Matter of Yun QuongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- People v. OreckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- People v. One 1940 ChryslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- People v. One 1933 Plymouth Sedan Deluxe Automobile, Engine No. P. D. 165124California Supreme Court · 1939
- People v. One 1937 Plymouth 6 4-Door SedanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.