Siskin v. Dembroff
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
THOMSON, J., pro tem.
two actions were brought by Harry Siskin, doing business as the Angeles Furniture Manufacturing Company, to recover the possession of certain furniture in the possession of defendant Dembroff in the one case, and certain other furniture in the possession of defendant Rosengarten in the other ease, or the value thereof, if recovery of the furniture could not be had. Discount Corporation of California, a Delaware corporation, intervened in each case, claiming ownership of the furniture. It was stipulated by ¿11 parties that, since the matters in both of the cases were…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Bancroft-Whitney Co. v. McHughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Pacific Finance Corp. v. HendleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Lampton v. Davis Standard Bread Co.California Court of Appeal · 1920
- Lowe v. WoodsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Rapp v. Fred W. Hauger Motors Co.California Court of Appeal · 1926
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- McKee v. PetersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Pagan v. SpencerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951