Quigley v. Gorham
California Supreme Court
Quigley v. Gorham, 5 Cal. 418 (Cal. 1855)
Heydenfeldt
Quigley v. Gorham
Opinion of the Court
Murray, C. J., concurred.
The words of a statute must be interpreted according to their common acceptation. In the Act which exempts certain articles from execution, the term “ wagon” is intended to mean a common vehicle for the transportation of goods, wares, and merchandize of all descriptions. A hackney coach used for the conveyance of passengers is a different article, and does not come within the equity or literal meaning of the Act.
Judgment reversed, and canse remanded;
Reference
- Full Case Name
- CHARLES QUIGLEY v. WILLIAM R. GORHAM, Sheriff
- Cited By
- 6 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- The words of a statute must be interpreted according to their common acceptation. In the Act which exempts certain articles from execution, the term “wagon” is intended to mean a common vehicle for the transportation of goods, wares, and merchandize. A hackney coach used for (he conveyance of passengers is a different article, and does not come within the equity or litoral meaning of the Act.