Williams v. Edelstein

• Decision Date: 04 April 1927
• Docket Number: 20224.
• Citation: 143 Wash. 198,253 P. 596
• Parties: WILLIAMS et ux. v. EDELSTEIN et al.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

253 P. 596

143 Wash. 198

WILLIAMS et ux. v. EDELSTEIN et al.

No. 20224.

Supreme Court of Washington

April 4, 1927

Department 1.

Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; Oswald, Judge.

Action by James A. Williams and wife against Isadore Edelstein and another. From a judgment for plaintiffs against named defendant, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Williams & Cornelius, of Spokane, for appellants.

Guy B Groff and William Hatch Davis, both of Spokane, for respondents.

FRENCH, J.

This action was brought by appellants against respondents to recover the value of certain jewelry which it was alleged has been converted by the respondent Edelstein. A writ of garnishment was issued directed to Wesley Turner, chief of police of the city of Spokane, who had in his possession at that time some $4,000 in travelers' checks and currency and, in addition thereto, certain jewelry, the property of Edelstein, which had come into his possession in the following manner: Edelstein was arrested in San Francisco Cal. The police officers at the time of his arrest took either from his person or from his grip in his room in the Palace Hotel in San Francisco all of the above-mentioned property, and Edelstein, being wanted by the police authorities at Spokane, was brought to Spokane, and both he and his property delivered into the possession of Wesley Turner, chief of police. Thereafter respondent Edelstein, as principal, and the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company as surety, executed a bond for the release of the garnishment. The respondent Edelstein by his answer in the principal case set forth the manner of the taking of the property and its possession by the chief of police challenged the legality of the garnishment, and the validity of the bond given to dissolve it; and moved to dismiss the garnishment on the ground that it was illegal and void. The lower court found that the garnishee defendant had no property in his possession, except as hereinbefore set forth; that he held such property solely in his official capacity as chief of police of Spokane, and was not otherwise indebted in any way. Appellants had judgment against the respondent Edelstein, but were denied judgment against the bond.

That property held by a sheriff, chief of police or other arresting officer is not subject to garnishment is no longer an open question in this state. 'The one question for decision is whether personal property,...