Dean v. Walkenhorst
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Modoc County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMyrick, J.
Action against a constable and his sureties for an alleged unlawful seizure of twenty-nine head of cattle and a bay filly. Judgment went for defendants, and plaintiff appealed.
On the 28th of August, 1876, one Swift was the owner of the property in question. On that day he sold the property to Mary Crowder, but no delivery or effort of delivery of possession was then or at any subsequent time had. A few days after the sale Swift and Mary Crowder intermarried, and have been ever since and are husband and wife. Swift had possession and control of the property, with the knowledge anj consent of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Watson v. RodgersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
3Cited by7 opinions
- In Re ScottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Harkness v. SmithIdaho Supreme Court · 1891
- Kelly v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Autrey v. BowenColorado Court of Appeals · 1896
- Crofts & Anderson v. H. L. Petersen Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.