Greenebaum v. Taylor

Citations

• 102 Cal. 624
• 36 P. 957
• 1894 Cal. LEXIS 698

Syllabus

<p>Pleading—Uncertainty of Description—Conjunctive Demurrer.—A demurrer to a complaint upon the ground that it is ambiguous, unintelligible, and uncertain, for the reason that it does not contain a sufficient description of the property eued for, if in fact the complaint is not ambiguous nor unintelligible, does not raise the’question of uncertainty as to the description. .L.:,</p> <p>Conversion of Saloon Fixtures—Rights of Owner of Building Immaterial.—In an action for the conversion of bar fixtures put into the plaintiff’s saloon on premises owned by a third person, and appropriated and converted by the defendant, the question whether, as between the owner of the building and the proprietor of the saloon, the fixtures could have been removed by the latter, does not arise.</p> <p>Id.—Proof of Conversion—Demand and Refusal.—Where the defendant removed part of the fixtures, detached other parts, and removed them from their position in the saloon against the wishes of the proprietor of the saloon, and refused to deliver them upon demand or to pay for them, his action constituted a conversion of the property.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence of Value—Cost of Property.—Upon the issue as to the value of the property it is proper to consider its cost as a circumstance tending to show value, and evidence of such cost is admissible.</p> <p>Id.—Inadmissible Evidence—Value of Removed Fixtures—Use.—It is not error to exclude evidence of the value of the fixtures when removed from their position, and considered without reference to the uses for which they were intended.</p>