Peterson v. Beggs
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Coúrt of Sierra County and from an order refusing to dissolve an attachment. Stanley A. Smith, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. R. C. McComish, and E. L. Rhodes, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the Court
SHIELDS, J., pro tem.
Plaintiff prosecuted this action to recover for services rendered' as a watchman or keeper of a . mining property known as the Kate Hardy Mine. He was employed by the defendant, John W. Morrell, but alleging that all of the defendants were mining partners, claims that they were jointly liable as such for the value of his services. Plaintiff recovered judgment. An attachment was issued in the case which defendants later moved to vacate. This is an appeal from the judgment and an order refusing to dissolve the attachment. The sole ground of attack upon the judgment ’ is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Prince v. LambCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Doyle v. BurnsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Hartney v. GoslingWyoming Supreme Court · 1902
- Le Fevre v. CastagnioSupreme Court of Colorado · 1881
- Nichols v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Fireman's Fund Insurance Company v. ShawcrossNevada Supreme Court · 1968
- Daly v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Anaheim National Bank v. KraemerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Corum v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Treat v. MurdockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.