Cohn v. Mulford
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixteenth District. Truett & Co. brought suit against Goldstein & Co. Defendant, Mulford, under a writ of attachment issued in that suit, levied on and sold certain goods in the possession of plaintiff. The facts appear ¡j in the opinion of the Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sixteenth District. Truett & Co. brought suit against Goldstein & Co. Defendant, Mulford, under a writ of attachment issued in that suit, levied on and sold certain goods in the possession of plaintiff. The facts appear ¡j in the opinion of the Court. The language of the record as to the second exception noticed by this Court is, “ on the trial of said action the defendant proposed to prove by a witness, Higginson, certain statements made by Goldstein, one of plaintiff’s vendors, concerning the sale, and the conditions of it, immediately after the sale. Plaintiff objected; the…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
Field, C. J. concurring.
1. Trespass against the Sheriff and his sureties for levying on certain goods as the property of Goldstein & Co., and levied on at the instance *52of a creditor of defendants in this process. The question made below was fraud in the sale. The defendants, to prove the fraud, offered to show that before this sale, “ about a year past, Cohn had bought Gold-stein & Co. out before, for the purpose of showing this fraud.” This evidence was rejected; and the propriety of its exclusion is the point before us. We do not see the materiality of the testimony, and no explanation was…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Wegerer v. JordanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- Walden v. PurvisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Garlick v. BowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Jones v. MorseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Briswalter v. PalomaresCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884