McCue v. Tunstead
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the late District Court of the twenty-second judicial district refusing a new trial. The defendant, a sheriff, seized the property in controversy, a stallion, under an execution against the plaintiff in favor of Nixdorf & Sehroeder. Plaintiff claimed the property as exempt, and brought this action, for its possession. The remaining facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.
The court found in substance that the plaintiff was the owner and in the possession of a farm of about one hundred and fifty acres of land, which he cultivates for raising grain, etc., and that the horse, which this action was brought to recover, was used as a work horse on said farm— sometimes singly and sometimes doubly. It is also found that the plaintiff is the publisher of a weekly newspaper and the proprietor of patent medicines, although his main reliance for support is upon his farm, “ and almost the entire income from that is from the services of said horse as a stallion and the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Security-First National Bank v. PiersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- In re the Estate of BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Sohner v. MasonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Tunstead v. NixdorfCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- In re JohnsonDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.