Susskind v. Hall

Citations

• 5 Cal. Unrep. 304
• 44 P. 328
• 1896 Cal. LEXIS 1113

Syllabus

<p>Attachment—Mingling of Goods—Illegal Seizure.—The fact that goods of an attachment defendant are in the possession of a third person, who has mingled them with his own goods, and refuses to point them out, but claims ownership of all, does not warrant the seizure of goods, his title to which is unquestioned, and which are readily distinguishable from those of the attachment defendant.1</p> <p>Attachment.—A Notice to an Officer of a Claim of Ownership of attached property is not vitiated by the statement therein that the claimant is the owner of all the property “except a portion owned by” another, who is not a party to the action.</p>