Case Name: ALFRED J. WELCH v. HART F. SMITH and F. M. KITTRELL
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1873
Citations: 45 Cal. 230
Docket Number: No. 3,548
Parties: ALFRED J. WELCH v. HART F. SMITH and F. M. KITTRELL.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 45
Pages: 230–231

Head Matter:
[No. 3,548.]
ALFRED J. WELCH v. HART F. SMITH and F. M. KITTRELL.
Judgment in Replevin.—In replevin, where the judgment for the plaintiff describes the property to he restored as “ buckwheat, valued at three hun- • dred and sixty-five dollars and seventy-five cents,” the description is insufficient to sustain the judgment, unless the judgment refer for a fuller description to the complaint, and there is a more definite description in the complaint.
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento.
The plaintiff had judgment in replevin, and the defendant appealed.
The other facts are stated in the opinion.
P. Dunlap, for Appellant.
■ The complaint is insufficient to support any judgment. In this action it is indispensable that the complaint describe the property sued for with that degree of certainty that an officer may be enabled to execute the process. (Root v. Woodruff, 6 Hill, 418; Relyea v. Drew, 1 Denio, 561; Wilber v. Brown, 3 Denio, 356; Walker v. Mosely, 5 Denio, 102.)
R. C. Clark, for Respondents.
The complaint is sufficient, especially after judgment. If not sufficiently explicit, advantage should have been taken of it by demurrer.

Opinion:
By the Court:
This is an action of replevin, and the plaintiff had judgment for the restitution and possession of the following named goods, mentioned in the complaint, to wit: Buckwheat, valued at three hundred and sixty-five dollars and seventy-five cents; sweet potatoes, valued at thirty-nine dollars; Irish potatoes, valued at one hundred and sixty dollars; squash, valued at one hundred and forty-five dollars; or in case restitution and possession thereof cannot be had, then for the sum of seven hundred and nine dollars and seventy-five cents, the value thereof as found by the Court. This description of goods recovered is obviously insufficient to sustain a judgment in replevin, unless, perhaps, it be aided in this instance by reference to the description set forth in the complaint. On looking into the complaint, however, the description there given is, if possible, even less definite than that found in the judgment itself. A portion of the property is there described as " about ten acres of potatoes, about four acres of squash," etc.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.