Daumiel v. Gorham
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Vose & Co. v. Stickney (Minn. 1862)
- George H. Fuller Desk Co. v. McDade (Cal. 1896)
- People ex rel. Rynerson v. Kelsey (Cal. 1868)
- Perkins v. Barnes (Nev. 1867)
- Paige v. O'Neal (Cal. 1859)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice Terry concurred.
Where the goods of a third person are mixed with the property, or in the apparent possession of the judgment debtor, a sheriff who levies upon them, supposing them to belong to the defendant in execution, is not liable as a trespasser ab initio. In order to charge him it is necessary to show a notice and demand of the goods, and a delay or refusal to deliver.
The Court below erred in instructing the jury that “the sheriff was a trespasser, and that they were to find the value of the goods.” This was virtually withdrawing the case from the jury, and assigning either as a conclusion of law, that the officer was primarily liable, or as a conclusion of fact from the testimony, that a demand and refusal had been proved, about which there was much contradictory evidence.
Judgment reversed and new trial ordered.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.