From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Freeborn v. Norcross

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1874
49 Cal. 313 (Cal. 1874)


49 Cal. 313 WILLIAM S. FREEBORN v. DAVID C. NORCROSS No. 3,895 Supreme Court of California October, 1874

         Appeal from the District Court, First Judicial District, County of San Luis Obispo.

         Action to recover the undivided half of a threshing machine, commenced August 21, 1872. The defendant was sheriff, and levied on the same as the property of William Freeborn, by virtue of an attachment placed in his hands, issued by a justice of the peace, in the suit of Goldtree Brothers v. William Freeborn. The trial was had before a jury, May 13, 1873. The transcript contained the judgment roll, and what purported to be instructions given by the Court to the jury, but no bill of exceptions. The defendant appealed from the judgment.

         JUDGES: Rhodes, J. Mr. Justice Niles did not express an opinion.


          RHODES, Judge

         This is an action to recover the possession of certain personal property, or the value thereof in case a delivery cannot be had, and damages for the detention. The jury rendered a verdict for the value of the property, with " legal interest" thereon from the time of the seizure by the sheriff to the date of the verdict; and damages in the sum of $ 50.

         Section 200 of the Practice Act (which was in force when the action was brought), authorizes the recovery of damages for the detention of personal property. But a party is not entitled to a gross sum for such damages and to interest upon the value of the property from the time it was taken. Interest in such case is given for damages, and if allowed in addition to a gross sum for damages, it would amount to double damages.

         The alleged errors of law in the instructions given at the plaintiff's request, cannot be reviewed, because neither the instructions nor any exceptions thereto, are presented by a bill of exceptions.

         Cause remanded, with direction to modify the judgment so that the plaintiff shall recover the sum of $ 375, with interest thereon (the rate specified in Section 1,920 of the Civil Code), from the date of the judgment. Remittitur forthwith.

Summaries of

Freeborn v. Norcross

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1874
49 Cal. 313 (Cal. 1874)
Case details for

Freeborn v. Norcross

Case Details


Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 1, 1874


49 Cal. 313 (Cal. 1874)

Citing Cases

Tucker v. Hagerty

The opinion states: "We are not called upon to inquire whether a different measure of damages should be…

Schmidt v. Nunan

         Interest was properly allowed as damages on the value of the property. (§§ 627, 667, Code Civ.…