Davis v. Eppinger
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixth District. Intervention.of a judgment creditor to set aside an attachment against the common debtor on the ground that suit was prematurely brought, and that hence the attachment is void as to the intervenors. One Eppinger, on the fifth day of July, 1860, executed and delivered to the Respondent Davis, his promissory note for five hundred and fifty-nine dollars and sixty cents, payable one day after date without grace.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sixth District. Intervention.of a judgment creditor to set aside an attachment against the common debtor on the ground that suit was prematurely brought, and that hence the attachment is void as to the intervenors. One Eppinger, on the fifth day of July, 1860, executed and delivered to the Respondent Davis, his promissory note for five hundred and fifty-nine dollars and sixty cents, payable one day after date without grace. On the following day, Davis instituted suit upon the note against Eppinger, and took out an attachment which was levied on the same day upon all his…
1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.
Field, C. J. concurring.
This is a proceeding by attachment to recover the amount of a promissory note executed by the defendant Eppinger. The note was drawn payable one day after date without grace, and the suit was commenced on the day following its execution. The attachment was issued at the commencement of the suit, and levied upon all the property of which Eppinger was the owner. A petition of intervention was filed by certain judgment creditors of Eppinger, seeking relief against the attachment.
If the intervenors have any rights in the premises, we are satisfied that they have pursued…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pierce v. JacksonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Smith v. GettingerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1847
- Patrick v. MontaderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- County of Yuba v. Adams & Co.California Supreme Court · 1857
- Wilcombe v. DodgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by11 opinions
- Kimball v. Richardson Kimball Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Potlatch Lumber Co. v. RunkelIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Faricy v. St. Paul Investment & Savings SocietySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Lewis v. HarwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Moreland v. Monarch Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1919
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.