TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Sampson v. Hammond

FREDERICK SAMPSON v. JOHN HAMMOND, J. DE LA MONTAIGNE HENRY PLUME

Sampson v. Hammond, 4 Cal. 184 (1854)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 15, 1854
Judges
Heydeneeldt, Murray
Citations
4 Cal. 184
Cited by 6
Headnotes
1 Conversion, eor Timber Cut. — An action of trover may be maintained against a trespasser, -who is cutting timber, as soon as the timber is out.
Summary
Appeal from the Seventh Judicial District. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, as assignee of a lease, or contract, giving the exclusive right and privilege for the space of ten years from date, to fell, saw or otherwise make use of all the timber standing on the rancho of the contracting party, in pursuance of which, the assignor of the plaintiff entered into and took possession of the rancho and built houses, cut timber, and commenced the erection of a mill. The complaint alleged that the defendants had cut and carried away a large quantity of timber. The Court nonsuited the plaintiff, on the ground that he could not maintain trover for logs which he had not cub Plaintiff appealed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Murray

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Mi Ch. J. Murray

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. J. Heydeneeldt concurred.

The Court below erred in nonsuiting the plaintiff, on the ground that he could not maintain an action for timber, unless the same was cut or felled by himself.

As soon as the logs were cut, they became the property of the plaintiff, by virtue of his lease, and the action of trover was the proper remedy.

Judgment reversed with costs, and new trial ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →
1870–1871: 11884–1885: 11886–1887: 11912–1913: 21924–1925: 118702026peak 1912 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne & Chicago Railway Co. v. Swinney97 Ind. 586 (1884)
  2. Tyson v. McGuineas25 Wis. 656 (1870)
  3. Michigan Land & Iron Co. v. Deer Lake Co.27 N.W. 10 (Mich. 1886)
  4. Brady v. Brady77 S.E. 235 (N.C. 1913)
  5. Brady v. Brady161 N.C. 324 (1913)
  6. Trust & Savings Bank v. Brusnahan147 N.E. 168 (Ind. Ct. App. 1925)

Most recent

  1. Trust & Savings Bank v. Brusnahan147 N.E. 168 (Ind. Ct. App. 1925)
  2. Brady v. Brady77 S.E. 235 (N.C. 1913)
  3. Brady v. Brady161 N.C. 324 (1913)
  4. Michigan Land & Iron Co. v. Deer Lake Co.27 N.W. 10 (Mich. 1886)
  5. Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne & Chicago Railway Co. v. Swinney97 Ind. 586 (1884)
  6. Tyson v. McGuineas25 Wis. 656 (1870)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list