Hodgkins v. Hook

Citations

• 23 Cal. 581

Syllabus

<p>In an action brought by a vendee of personal property against a Sheriff, to recover possession of the same, where the Sheriff claims the property under an execution in favor of a creditor of the vendor, and attacks the sale for fraud, if the testimony is conflicting as to whether there was an actual and continued change of possession in the plaintiff after the sale to him, this question should be submitted to the jury. If, however, the facts are undisputed, it is a question of law, whether these facts constitute a 'continued and exclusive possession in the vendee.</p> <p>Where, after a sale of personal property, the creditors of the vendor attack the same for fraud, and, on the trial, there is evidence that the vendee, after the sale and delivery, exercised some slight acts of ownership and control over the property, but this is not shown to have been done with the knowledge or consent of the vendor, the fact that the vendor does not offer any evidence explanatory of the vendee’s acts, does not add anything to the weight of the evidence touching the vendee’s connection with the property.</p>