Field v. Burr

California Supreme Court June 25, 1900

Field v. Burr, 129 Cal. 44 (Cal. 1900)

Smith

Opinion of the Court

SMITH, C.

Appeal from a judgment for intervenor in a suit for the recovery of personal property levied upon hy defendant, as sheriff, under attachment in favor of plaintiff against third party.

The findings are unusually full and explicit, hut in "the conclusions of law the word “plaintiff” is inadvertently used for “intervenor,” which is the ground urged for reversal. (Dougherty v. Ward, 89 Cal. 81.)

We recommend that the judgment he affirmed.

Gray, C., and Haynes, C., concurred.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment is affirmed. McFarland, J., Temple, J., Henshaw, J.

Reference

Full Case Name: D. W. FIELD v. JOHN BURR, Sheriff, etc., CAROLINE KOSTER, Intervenor and
Status: Published
Syllabus: Findings—Immaterial Variance—Judgment.—Where the findings of fact are full and explicit, a judgment entered thereon In favor of an intervenor will not be reversed merely because in the conclusions of law the word “plaintiff” is inadvertently used for “intervenor.”