Wetherly v. Straus
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the eity and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The plaintiff deposited with the defendant, on the 3d of September, 1888, for safe-keeping, a certificate of deposit that had been issued to her own order. On the next day, an action was commenced by one Haviland, representing certain assigned claims (one of which was assigned by the defendant) against the firm of Bannister & Wetherly, and under a writ of attachment issued in said action a garnishment was served *285upon the defendant against the certificate of deposit that had been left with him by the plaintiff. The defendant gave no notice to the plaintiff of these proceedings until after she…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dodge v. MeyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Amador Canal & Mining Co. v. MitchellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by31 opinions
- Moore v. CoppCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Estate of YoellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Wendling Lumber Co. v. Glenwood Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- In Re the Estate of FathCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Burris v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.