Woodham v. Cline
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. W. H. Clark, Judge. The original complaint, in addition to the averments of conversion of personal property set forth in the i opinion, alleged that defendants wrongfully, willfully, and maliciously entered her house, which she held under leasehold, by force, and tore up the carpets and draperies, and injured the plaintiff’s property. Further facts are stated in the opinion.1
1Opinion of the Court
COOPER, C.
This action was brought to recover the value of personal property alleged to have been converted by defendants. The court filed findings upon which judgment was entered for plaintiff. This appeal is from the judgment upon the judgment-roll.
The only point urged on this appeal is that the court failed to find upon the pleas of the statute of limitations set up in defendants’ answers. It is alleged in the answers that the defendant Pease brought suit against Hay and Alice Richards, and procured a writ of attachment against them, which writ was •delivered to defendant Cline, as the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ready v. M'donaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Frantz v. HarperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
3Cited by10 opinions
- Moss v. Underwriters' Report, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1938
- Scott v. SymonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- People v. SullivanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- De Tolna v. De TolnaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Harris v. Mount Washington Co.California Court of Appeal · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.