Kellogg v. Colgan

California Supreme Court

Kellogg v. Colgan

23 P. 526, 3 Cal. Unrep. 250, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1169

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 25, 1890

DocketNo. 12,895

StatusPublished

This text of 23 P. 526 (Kellogg v. Colgan) 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

Kellogg v. Colgan, 23 P. 526, 3 Cal. Unrep. 250, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1169 (Cal. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

SHARPSTEIN, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting plaintiff a new trial in an action for the conversion, by the defendant, of a mare alleged to belong to plaintiff. The answer of the defendant denies all the allegations of the complaint, and for a further defense alleges that the mare was taken by him as sheriff of Sonoma county upon an execution against one Merchant, in whose possession the mare then was. The verdict of the jury was m favor of the defendant. Plaintiff moved, upon a statement of the case, for a new trial, which was granted, and, as before stated, this appeal is from that order. We cannot disturb the order. The evidence is conflicting Order affirmed.

We concur: McFarland, J. ¡ Thornton, J.

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

SHARPSTEIN, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting plaintiff a new trial in an action for the conversion, by the defendant, of a mare alleged to belong to plaintiff. The answer of the defendant denies all the allegations of the complaint, and for a further defense alleges that the mare was taken by him as sheriff of Sonoma county upon an execution against one Merchant, in whose possession the mare then was. The verdict of the jury was m favor of the defendant. Plaintiff moved, upon a statement of the case, for a new trial, which was granted, and, as before stated, this appeal is from that order. We cannot disturb the order. The evidence is conflicting Order affirmed.

We concur: McFarland, J. ¡ Thornton, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 P. 526, 3 Cal. Unrep. 250, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kellogg-v-colgan-cal-1890.