Bekins v. Dieterle
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. D. K. Trash, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. J. Marion Brooks, F. B. Guthrie, and Henry E. Wills, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
Appeal from judgment in favor of the defendants, and from an order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new (rial.
The appellant, Kate Bekins, is the wife of M. Bekins. On December 29, 1896, Minnie and William Dieterle commenced an action against M. Bekins to recover damages for the conversion of certain personal property alleged to have been delivered to him for storage in his warehouse, and which property he refused to redeliver to the plaintiffs in said suit on demand therefor. The judgment rendered in favor of M. Bekins on the first trial was reversed (Dieterle v. Bekins, 143 Cal. 683, [77…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- First National Bank of Los Angeles v. MaxwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Bull v. BrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Dieterle v. BekinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Schuyler v. BroughtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Judson v. LyfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Fross v. WottonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Killian v. KillianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- Benson v. HarrimanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Erwin E. Hassen v. Sam Jonas, Trustee of the Estate of Pomona Properties, Inc., Doing Business as Steve's Ranch Market, BankruptCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967
- Johns v. BaenderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.