Feeley v. Boyd
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
COOPER, C.
Replevin to recover the possession of ten tons of dried peaches taken from plaintiff by defendant, as sheriff, under a writ of attachment against Le Roy Gray and Charles Gray, hereafter called Gray Brothers; the said writ being in favor of “The Cone and Kimball Company,” a corporation.
Plaintiff recovered judgment; defendant moved for a new trial, which was denied, and this appeal is from the order denying a new trial. Plaintiff claims under a sale from Gray Brothers, and no question is made as to the fact of such sale, nor is there any question as to actual fraud or want of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bassinger v. SpanglerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1886
- McFarland v. United States Mutual Accident Ass'nSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Dubois v. SpinksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Hickey v. Coschina.California Supreme Court · 1901
- Carpenter v. ClarkNevada Supreme Court · 1866
3Cited by13 opinions
- McCaffey C. Co., Inc. v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Hassell v. BungeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Integrated, Inc. v. Alec Fergusson Electrical ContractorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Frenzer v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Ex Parte FowlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.