Hitchcock v. Hassett
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sonoma County. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
This is an action to recover possession of personal property.
A demurrer was interposed to the complaint, which was sustained by the court, and plaintiff declining to amend, final judgment was entered in favor of defendant, from which plaintiff prosecutes this appeal.
The complaint shows that in 1878 plaintiff leased to one Arthur Thing, for a term of five years, certain premises in the county of Sonoma, with thirteen hundred sheep, and other stock and property, at an annual rental of $1,540, payable one half on the 15th of June in each year, and the remaining half on the 1st of…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Gruber v. Pacific States Savings & Loan Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
- Ferguson v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Citizens' Securities Co. v. HammelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Marshall v. LuizCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Ibbetson v. PeairsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.