McKenty v. Gladwin, Hugg & Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, County of San Francisco. A statement of the facts, sufficient to understand the points decided, appears in the opinion of the Court.
1ConcurrenceTerry, C. J.
The plaintiff commenced his suit by attachment, and seized certain goods and chattels of defendants. The intervenors also sued in attachment, and levied their writ upon the same goods; and then intervened, upon the ground that the claim of plaintiff was fraudulent as against creditors. The plaintiff had judgment in the Court below, and the intervenors appealed.
It is objected, by the learned counsel for the plaintiff, that Garrison and others could not intervene in this suit. But it is unnecessary to examine that question, as the objection was not raised in the Court below. The intervention…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Goldner v. SpencerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Tully v. HarloeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Zeitinger v. Hargadine-Mckittrick Dry Goods Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1923
- Newman v. BullockSupreme Court of Colorado · 1896
- Dandini v. DandiniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.