Kewen v. Johnson

California Supreme Court

Kewen v. Johnson

11 Cal. 260

DecidedJuly 1, 1858

StatusPublished

This text of 11 Cal. 260 (Kewen v. Johnson) 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

Kewen v. Johnson, 11 Cal. 260 (Cal. 1858).

Pincite

Opinion

Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court—

Field, J., concurring.

There is no error in the judgment. By the record it appears that the greater part of the money in the hands of the defendant, under the attachment in the case of Goodwin v. Glazer, is claimed by a third party, who has instituted suit to recover it, which suit is now pending and undetermined. If this suit should be determined in favor of the claimant, the sum in the hands of the defendant will be sufficient to satisfy the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court—

Field, J., concurring.

There is no error in the judgment. By the record it appears that the greater part of the money in the hands of the defendant, under the attachment in the case of Goodwin v. Glazer, is claimed by a third party, who has instituted suit to recover it, which suit is now pending and undetermined. If this suit should be determined in favor of the claimant, the sum in the hands of the defendant will be sufficient to satisfy the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Cal. 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kewen-v-johnson-cal-1858.