From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sharon v. Nunan

Supreme Court of California
Mar 7, 1883
63 Cal. 234 (Cal. 1883)

Summary

holding that replevin was a proper remedy for recovery of money in "gold and silver coins, sealed up in a canvas bag, marked with a tag" and held in a vault

Summary of this case from Tsai v. Wang

Opinion

         APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial.

         COUNSEL:

         C. S. Roe, for Appellant.

         Lloyd, Newlands & Wood, for Respondent.


         OPINION

          ROSS, Judge

         We see no merit in the appeal. Beyond question, the money sued for was the property of the plaintiff. It was in the possession of one Little, an employee of plaintiff, to be used by him in paying certain of plaintiff's taxes. The money was in gold and silver coins, sealed up in a canvas bag, marked with a tag, on which was written Little's name, and deposited in one of the vaults of the Safe Deposit Company, in the city and county of San Francisco. It was in this condition when it was seized by the defendant as the property of Little, under and by virtue of an execution against him. For the defendant, who is the appellant here, it is contended that replevin is not a proper remedy for the recovery of money thus situated. The authorities are clear that it is. (3 Blackst. Com. 151; Skidmore v. Taylor, 29 Cal. 619; Griffith v. Bogardus, 15 Cal. 410.)

         Next it is said that demand on defendant for the money was necessary before plaintiff could maintain the action, and that there was no demand made. As no demand was necessary, we find it unnecessary to decide whether the demand proved was or was not a sufficient demand. ( Boulware v. Craddock, 30 Cal. 190; Wellman v. English, 38 Cal. 583.)

         We do not perceive the relevancy to the case before the court of the question of Dobinson's authority to draw the check in plaintiff's name, on which Little drew the money from the Bank of California. The bank did not question the authority, but paid the money. The money was the plaintiff's, and that was the important question, aside from those already disposed of.

         Judgment and order affirmed.

         McKINSTRY, J., and McKEE, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Sharon v. Nunan

Supreme Court of California
Mar 7, 1883
63 Cal. 234 (Cal. 1883)

holding that replevin was a proper remedy for recovery of money in "gold and silver coins, sealed up in a canvas bag, marked with a tag" and held in a vault

Summary of this case from Tsai v. Wang
Case details for

Sharon v. Nunan

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM SHARON, RESPONDENT, v. MATTHEW NUNAN, APPELLANT

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Mar 7, 1883

Citations

63 Cal. 234 (Cal. 1883)

Citing Cases

Williams Management Enter v. Buonauro

Replevin is not a proper remedy to recover "funds" held in an account.See Malsby v. Gamble, 61 Fla. 310, 54…

Tsai v. Wang

Here, Plaintiff does not allege that the money allegedly owed by Defendant is "marked or designated in some…