Watson v. Rodgers
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, Stanislaus County. Replevin for two hundred and thirteen sacks of barley, a threshing machine, one hundred tons of hay, and sixteen mules. The defendant justified under a writ of attachment in the case of A. O. Paulsell v. J. D. Watson, in which Paulsell obtained judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, Stanislaus County. Replevin for two hundred and thirteen sacks of barley, a threshing machine, one hundred tons of hay, and sixteen mules. The defendant justified under a writ of attachment in the case of A. O. Paulsell v. J. D. Watson, in which Paulsell obtained judgment. The Court found that the defendant, as Sheriff, had seized the property in the said suit; that the plaintiff is the son of the J. D. Watson, defendant in the attachment suit; that all the property had been sold or given by J. D. Watson to his son, the plaintiff,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Rhodes, J.:
It appears from the findings that the property in controversy was owned by J. D. Watson, the plaintiff’s father, and was in his possession; that in 1871 he gave a portion of it to the plaintiff, and within two years thereafter he sold another portion to him, but there was no delivery of the possession of any of the property until September, 1876, when the plaintiff removed the larger portion of it from the rancho of the plaintiff’s father to a rancho of which the plaintiff had the possession, that at that place the property was attached on the 4th day of October,…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Brown v. O'NealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Western Mining Supply Co. v. QuinnMontana Supreme Court · 1909
- Edwards v. Sonoma Valley BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Adams v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Menick v. CarsonDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.