Goodwin v. Garr

Decided July 1, 1857

California Supreme Court · decided 1857-07-01

This was an action to recover the value of thirteen mules and six horses, attached by defendant, sheriff of Sutter county, as the property of one Ford. The defendant denied that the property belonged to the plaintiff, and also justified under the attachment.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1857-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently August 1967

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, C. J., concurring.

¶1The only question in the case is, whether plaintiff, by his proof, made out a prima facie right to recover in the entire absence of any proof on the part of the defendant.

¶2We think the proof ample to show title prima facie in plaintiff. Possession of personal property is prima facie evidence of ownership. 2. Cal. Rep., 373. The possession of the servant is the possession of the master. 1 Cal. R., 161.

¶3In this case, the plaintiff had possession for some considerable time before the seizure, and exercised dominion over the property.

¶4Judgment affirmed.