From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shuffleton v. Hill

Supreme Court of California
Oct 25, 1880
62 Cal. 483 (Cal. 1880)

Opinion

         Department Two

         Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff in the Eighth District Court in and for the County of Humboldt. Haines, J.

         COUNSEL:

         James Hanna and W. H. Brumfield, for Appellants.

          S. M. Buck, E. W. Wilson, and J. D. H. Chamberlin, for Respondent.


         OPINION          The Court:

         The contract under which the logs in question in this suit were cut was made April 10, 1876, by which Greenlaw was to cut and deliver logs at certain specified times and places, receiving compensation at specified rates and times, as logs were delivered. The act under which plaintiff claims a lien as a laborer upon the logs was passed March 30, 1878. The terms of that contract can not be considered as changed by that act. Plaintiff certainly has no more rights as to what money was due than Greenlaw, or his assignee would have had; and if, by the terms of that contract, no money was payable to Greenlaw at the time the liens were filed, plaintiff had no lien to be enforced.

         Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.


Summaries of

Shuffleton v. Hill

Supreme Court of California
Oct 25, 1880
62 Cal. 483 (Cal. 1880)
Case details for

Shuffleton v. Hill

Case Details

Full title:C. D. SHUFFLETON v. ROBERT C. HILL et al.

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 25, 1880

Citations

62 Cal. 483 (Cal. 1880)

Citing Cases

Virden v. Neese

And in 16 California Jurisprudence 678, it is stated that a logger, having a lien on logs cut by him, does…

People v. Gibson

(Lawson on Expert and Opinion Evidence, 132, note 11; Caleb v. State , 39 Miss. 721; Monk v. State, 27 Tex.…