Legal Opinion
Adams v. La Comb
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Decided June 15, 1789PublishedCited by 4 opinions
REPLEVIN. The material question, on the trial of this cause, was, Whether the goods of a stranger, being removed from the premises before a distress, could be pursued and seized, within the thirty days, which the Act of Assembly allows for pursuing and seizing the goods of the Tenant? See 1 State Laws, 433, &c.
1Opinion of the Court
Shippen, President,
in the charge to the Jury, delivered it as the clear opinion of the Court, that the right of pursuing and seizing goods after their removal, was confined to the goods of the Lessee, from whom the rent was really due; and that the goods of a stranger could only be distrained while they were on the premisses.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Derbyshire Bros. v. McManamySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Walsh v. Philadelphia BourseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Dawson v. WatsonSuperior Court of Delaware · 1880
- Dawson v. WatsonSuperior Court of Delaware · 1880