Legal Opinion

Calexico Lumber Co. v. Emerson

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 14, 1921No. Civ. No. 3391PublishedCited by 9 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.

This is an action of conversion. The plaintiff had judgment and the defendants appeal.

The first point made by appellants is that the evidence is insufficient to support the court’s finding of conversion. The property involved in the action consisted of 556 bundles of laths,' and the parties had already had a contest over the same property in an action of replevin. In that action, which, for convenience, will be referred to henceforth as the replevin action, the defendants in this action, appellants also, were plaintiffs, and vice versa. The replevin action resulted peculiarly, in this, that…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Banta v. SillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Miles v. WoodwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Willson v. CleavelandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Buhne v. CorbettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
  5. Bell v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Stromerson v. AverillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. People v. DegnenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  3. Waer v. WaerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Hoffman v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927
  5. South Santa Clara Valley Water Conservation District v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API