Williams v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This was an action of claim and delivery for the recovery of specific personal property or its value. To obtain possession of the property pending the action, plaintiff proceeded under the provisions of the code, filed an undertaking in twice the estimated value of the property, and, under this undertaking, took the property into possession. He secured his bond from a surety company, as authorized by section 1056 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and in his memorandum of costs and disbursements, included the item of $43.75 premium charge paid for the bond. On motion of defendant the court, in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Fox v. Hale & Norcross Silver Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Edison v. American Mutoscope Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1902
- Lee Injector Mfg. Co. v. Penberthy Injector Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1901
- The WillowdeneDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1899
- Wadleigh v. Duluth Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Moss v. Underwriters' Report, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1938
- Davis v. KGO-T v. Inc.California Supreme Court · 1998
- Garcia v. Hyster Co.California Court of Appeal · 1994
- Catello v. I.T.T. General ControlsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Orpheum Building Co. v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.