Mahr v. Livingstone

Replevin is essentially a possessory action, and it is requisite for the maintenance thereof that the defendant should be in possession or control of the chattels sued for at the time the action is commenced, except Avhere the same have been wrongfully disposed of. Sinnott v. Feiock, 165 N. Y. 444; Wheeler v. Allen, 51 id. 37, 42; Christie v. Corbett, 34 How. Pr. 19; Alaske Untersteutzung Verein v. Wall, 28 Misc. Rep. 174. It is undisputed that at the time that this action was commenced the chattel sought to be recovered was not in the possession or control of defendant, but on the contrary…