Legal Opinion

Trumpler v. Bemerly

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1870No. 2,475PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth District, Tolo County. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtSprague, J.

The only question deemed necessary to consider, upon the view we have taken of this case, is whether the title or right of property in plaintiff to the sheep, lambs, etc., described in the complaint was divested and passed to the vendor of defendant by virtue of proceedings had under the Act of April 27, 1863, applicable to Tolo County, entitled “An Act concerning estrays in certain counties in this State.” . (Stats. 1863, p. 697.) This statute, as all others prescribing modes by which a party may be divested of his property without his consent, must be strictly construed; and a party…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bensley v. Mountain Lake Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1859
  2. Curran v. Shattuck.California Supreme Court · 1864

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Cook v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  2. Snell v. BradburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. McCarty v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Pettit v. DukeUtah Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Katsaris v. CookCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API