Mills v. Dunlap
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District. The facts of this case are stated in the opinion of the court. The plaintiff claimed of defendant the value of certain property, which had been seized by the sheriff, on execution issued by Dunlap against Solms and Hutchinson, and which he claimed as his own property. In the course of the proceedings, the deposition of Gr.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District. The facts of this case are stated in the opinion of the court. The plaintiff claimed of defendant the value of certain property, which had been seized by the sheriff, on execution issued by Dunlap against Solms and Hutchinson, and which he claimed as his own property. In the course of the proceedings, the deposition of Gr. W. Solms taken before a notary, was filed, February 19th, 1852, on the part of the plaintiff, and on the same day defendant moved the court to suppress the reading of the same, for the following reasons :— 1. Because notice of the…
1Opinion of the CourtWells, Justice
This was an action, brought by the plaintiff in the court below, to recover the value of certain doors, window-sashes, &c.
The property in question was seized, upon execution, in favor of defendant, Dunlap, against Solms and Hutchinson, and sold by the sheriff, by the express orders of the defendant, Dunlap. The property, it is alleged, belonged to the plaintiffs, and Dunlap was notified of the fact at the time of the sale. Two trials were had in the court below, and before the second trial, a deposition of George W. Solms, a witness on the part of the plaintiffs, was taken, before C. C.…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Cody v. FilleySupreme Court of Colorado · 1878
- Kinkade v. HowardSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
- Sannes v. McEwanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932