Bronzan v. Drobaz
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated' in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher, C.
On the twenty-seventh day of October, 1887, the plaintiff herein recovered a judgment in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco against the Gold Lead Gold and Silver Mining Company, a corporation, for the sum of $1,271.95,.and $18 costs of suit. On this judgment an execution was issued and returned unsatisfied. The return states that the execution was duly levied upon “ all moneys, goods, credits, effects, debts due or owing, or any other personal property in possession or under control of Matteo Drobaz, belonging to the defendant named in said writ.”…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Miller v. LucoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Coffey v. GreenfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Loring v. StuartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Raimond v. EldridgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lawless v. CalawayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Millar v. MillarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Brown v. Sterling Furniture Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
- Lieberman v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- De Leonis v. HammelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.