Sharon v. Nunan
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
We see no merit in the appeal. Beyond question, the money sued for was the property of the plaintiff. It was in the possession of one Little, an employee of plaintiff, to be used by him in paying certain of plaintiff’s taxes. The money was in gold and silver coins, sealed up in a canvas bag, marked with a tag, on which was written Little’s name, and deposited in one of the vaults of the Safe Deposit Company, in the city and county of San Francisco. It was in this condition when it was *235seized by the defendant as the property of Little, under and by virtue of an execution against him. For the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Boulware v. CraddockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Skidmore v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- People v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by5 opinions
- Williams Management Enterprises v. BuonauroDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
- Brenot v. RobinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Eddings v. BonerCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1897
- Burchett v. PurdySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1894
- Hillyer v. EggersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917