Legal Opinion

Ricketts v. Dorrel

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1876PublishedCited by 7 opinions

From tbe Obio Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBiddle, J.

Replevin, commenced before a justice of tbe peace. Tbe cause of action is stated as follows:

“ "William Dorrel, being duly sworn, says that bis personal property, consisting of seven hundred and thirtyeigbt rails of walnut and oak wood, of the value of fifteen dollars, and one hundred and sixty-four stakes of oak and *471walnut wood, of the value of live dollars, have been wrongfully taken and are unlawfully detained by James C. Ricketts; that said personal property has not been taken by virtue of any execution or other writ against him, and that he has sustained damages, by said wrongful taking…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Switzer v. MillerIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Marshall v. BeeberIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Sherlock v. First National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Smith v. StanfordIndiana Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Bass Foundry & Machine Works v. GallentineIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  3. Hamilton v. HuntleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Slack v. CollinsIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Moore v. CombsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API