Opinion
Appeal from the District Court, Seventh Judicial District, Solano County.
The defendant was a constable in Solano County, and an attachment and execution were placed in his hands, issued in the suit of F. & M. Dinkenspiel v. J. D. Perkins. By virtue of the writs defendant levied on a quantity of personal property as the property of Perkins. Plaintiffs laid claim to the property. This suit was brought to recover possession of the same. Plaintiffs recovered judgment, and defendant appealed.
COUNSEL:
M. A. Wheaton, for Appellant.
Swan & Hayes, for Respondent.
JUDGES: Sawyer, J.
OPINION
SAWYER, Judge
This is an action to recover a quantity of lumber. Defendant justifies the taking and detention under an attachment and execution issued in the suit of Frank et al. v. Perkins. Defendant offered in evidence the proceedings before a constable's jury to try the right of property on a claim made by plaintiffs in pursuance of sections two hundred and eighteen and six hundred and two of the Practice Act, and the verdict of the constable's jury against the plaintiffs in that proceeding. The evidence was excluded on objection by plaintiffs, and defendant excepted. This verdict did not protect the constable, and was properly excluded. (Perkins v. Thornburgh , 10 Cal. 191.)
We see no error of law, and cannot say that the verdict is not supported by the evidence.
Judgment affirmed.