Legal Opinion

Banning v. Marleau

California Supreme Court

Decided July 30, 1901No. L.A. No. 864PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

The facts concerning this action and the law of the case will be found in the opinions of this court upon former appeals, reported in 101 Cal. 238, and 121 Cal. 240. This trial was without a jury. The value of the property was stipulated. The court found against the plaintiff, and gave judgment for defendant for the return of the property, or its value,—six hundred dollars. Plaintiff appeals.

The property had been seized under writs of attachment issued by the justice’s court in an action in which one Dr. Hannon was defendant. It was taken from the possession of Dr. Hannon while upon a ranch…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fredericks v. TracyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Banning v. MarleauCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Brown v. O'NealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Banning v. MarleauCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Cooke v. AguirreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Louk v. PattenIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Hemenway v. ThaxterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Sidney v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API