Smith v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Smith v. Superior Court

276 P. 1080, 98 Cal. App. 118, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 597

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedApril 4, 1929

DocketDocket No. 6850.

StatusPublished

This text of 276 P. 1080 (Smith v. Superior Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smith v. Superior Court, 276 P. 1080, 98 Cal. App. 118, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 597 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

Petition for certiorari.

It appears therefrom that the petitioner, as plaintiff in an action in claim and delivery commenced in the justice’s court, sought the immediate possession of certain personal property described in the complaint. After judgment in that action an appeal was taken to the Superior Court. The cause came on for hearing, and the sole issue presented was whether or not plaintiff was entitled to the possession of the property involved. It is petitioner’s contention herein that the Superior Court in rendering judgment went outside the issue and found defendants to be the owners free and clear of any right, title or interest of plaintiff, and that this finding is contrary to the evidence and not involved within the issues of the case.

It seems clear to us that the findings and judgment when read together show that the trial court was merely dealing *119 with the question of the right of possession of the property and not with any question involving the ownership of the same.

The application is denied.

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

THE COURT.

Petition for certiorari.

It appears therefrom that the petitioner, as plaintiff in an action in claim and delivery commenced in the justice’s court, sought the immediate possession of certain personal property described in the complaint. After judgment in that action an appeal was taken to the Superior Court. The cause came on for hearing, and the sole issue presented was whether or not plaintiff was entitled to the possession of the property involved. It is petitioner’s contention herein that the Superior Court in rendering judgment went outside the issue and found defendants to be the owners free and clear of any right, title or interest of plaintiff, and that this finding is contrary to the evidence and not involved within the issues of the case.

It seems clear to us that the findings and judgment when read together show that the trial court was merely dealing *119 with the question of the right of possession of the property and not with any question involving the ownership of the same.

The application is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 P. 1080, 98 Cal. App. 118, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-superior-court-calctapp-1929.