Gaudette v. Roeder
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from tbe District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, Lincoln County. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. The terms of the- bond could not be changed by a parol agreement between Boeder and Travis, neither could Boeder and Travis enter into any agreement to bind the defendants Glissan and Sultan without their consent.
Read the full summary
Appeal from tbe District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, Lincoln County. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. The terms of the- bond could not be changed by a parol agreement between Boeder and Travis, neither could Boeder and Travis enter into any agreement to bind the defendants Glissan and Sultan without their consent. (Quillen v. Arnold, 12 Nev. 234; Miller v. Steioart et al., 9 Wheat. 680; Boioers v. Beck et al., 2 Nev. 152; 10 Johnson, 180.) II.' The judgment of Gaudette v. Glissan et al. is a perfect bar to this action. (Dátil v. Pacheco et al., 21 Cal. 438; Ereeman on…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Leonard, J.:
On the sixteenth day of May, 1874, an action was pending in the district court of Lincoln county, wherein defendant John Boeder was plaintiff and one P. Guertin was defendant. Boeder caused a writ of attachment to be issued and delivered to one Travis, sheriff of the county, who attached about three hundred cords of wood, as the property of Guertin. Plaintiff served a written notice upon sheriff Travis, claiming the wood as his property, and demanding its return to him. Boeder required the sheriff to retain the property attached, and thereupon the defendants executed…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gaudette v. TravisNevada Supreme Court · 1876