Lawrence v. Coyne (1882) · DecisionDepot

Lawrence v. Coyne

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Nov 17, 1882 No. No. 8,511Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a sheriff is justified in seizing property under a process that is regular on its face, regardless of whether the underlying complaint contained a sufficient description of the property.

Issues

Whether a sheriff is liable for seizing property under a process that is regular on its face even if the underlying complaint lacks a sufficient property description.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The process was regular on its face, and justified the defendant in seizing the property.”

Synopsis

Appeal from a judgment for the defendant in the Superior ■ Court of the County of San Diego, McNeally, J., and from an order denying a new trial in the same Court. Sepulveda, J.

The Court : Plaintiff sued defendant as the Sheriff of San Diego county, for the possession of certain sheep or the value thereof, and defendant justified under a seizure made by him in an action brought against the plaintiff and others by one Joseph Lambeye. There is but one point made on the appeal, and that is that the complaint filed in the case of Lambeye v. Lawrence et al. did not contain a sufficient description of the property. If the point were well taken it would not follow therefrom that the plaintiff has any cause of action against the defendant. The Court had jurisdiction. The process was regular on its face, and justified the defendant in seizing the property.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Lawrence v. Coyne

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief