Legal Opinion

Fairchild v. Amsbaugh

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1863PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from the Fifth Judicial District. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.

This is an action to recover for personal property sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendants. The defendant Amsbaugh appeared and filed an answer denying the allegations of the complaint. The summons was duly served upon McKinley, the other defendant, but he failed to answer. A jury trial was had, and the following verdict was rendered: “ We, the jury, find for the plaintiff four hundred and fifty dollars,” and thereupon a judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff, against the defendant Amsbaugh, *574for that sum, and costs. Amsbaugh moved for a new trial, which was denied, and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Frisch v. CalerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Washburn v. AldenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
  3. Easterly v. Bassignano & LarcoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  4. Sparks v. KohlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Griffith v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Esbensen v. HoverColorado Court of Appeals · 1893
  3. Esbensen v. HoverColorado Court of Appeals · 1893

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API