Field v. Burr

California Supreme Court

Field v. Burr

129 Cal. 44

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJune 25, 1900

DocketL. A. No. 650

StatusPublished

This text of 129 Cal. 44 (Field v. Burr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Field v. Burr, 129 Cal. 44 (Cal. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, C.

Appeal from a judgment for intervenor in a suit for the recovery of personal property levied upon hy defendant, as sheriff, under attachment in favor of plaintiff against third party.

The findings are unusually full and explicit, hut in "the conclusions of law the word “plaintiff” is inadvertently used for “intervenor,” which is the ground urged for reversal. (Dougherty v. Ward, 89 Cal. 81.)

We recommend that the judgment he affirmed.

Gray, C., and Haynes, C., concurred.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment is affirmed. McFarland, J., Temple, J., Henshaw, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SMITH, C.

Appeal from a judgment for intervenor in a suit for the recovery of personal property levied upon hy defendant, as sheriff, under attachment in favor of plaintiff against third party.

The findings are unusually full and explicit, hut in "the conclusions of law the word “plaintiff” is inadvertently used for “intervenor,” which is the ground urged for reversal. (Dougherty v. Ward, 89 Cal. 81.)

We recommend that the judgment he affirmed.

Gray, C., and Haynes, C., concurred.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment is affirmed. McFarland, J., Temple, J., Henshaw, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 Cal. 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/field-v-burr-cal-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack