Palmer v. Melvin
6 Cal. 651
Opinion
Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt and Mr. Justice Terry concurred.
The demurrer to the plaintiff’s complaint was well taken, and should have been sustained.
The complaint does not state that the property attached was released upon the execution and delivery of the bond. To charge the defendants, it is necessary to allege the consideration of the undertaking, and a mere reference to the condition of the bond, is insufficient.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Palmer v. Melvin, 6 Cal. 651 (Cal. 1856).
6 Cal. 651 (Palmer v. Melvin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Coburn v. Pearson
57 Cal. 306 (California Supreme Court, 1881)
Jenner v. Stroh
52 Cal. 504 (California Supreme Court, 1877)
Williamson v. Blattan
9 Cal. 500 (California Supreme Court, 1858)