Harding v. Coburn
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of trespass against a deputy sheriff for taking and carrying away one wagon carriage, ironed, one wagon body, partly finished, five hundred felloes, two hundred carnage hubs, one cab body, one wheel jack, two axle bat arms, one set of axle bars, a lot of scrap iron, and one hoop all of the value of four hundred and twenty dollars At the trial in the court of common pleas, before Ward, J. the defendant justified under a writ against Rufus Rowell, as whose…
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass against a deputy sheriff for taking and carrying away one wagon carriage, ironed, one wagon body, partly finished, five hundred felloes, two hundred carnage hubs, one cab body, one wheel jack, two axle bat arms, one set of axle bars, a lot of scrap iron, and one hoop all of the value of four hundred and twenty dollars At the trial in the court of common pleas, before Ward, J. the defendant justified under a writ against Rufus Rowell, as whose property the defendant attached the chattels described in the plaintiff’s writ. The plaintiff claimed the chattels under…
1Opinion of the CourtDewey, J.
The first point, arising upon the mortgage under which the plaintiff claims to hold the property in controversy, is as to the validity of a general description of the property mortgaged ; such as “ all my tools and implements in my shop in B.,” or other equally general words of description. It is insisted by the defendant, that such general description has no legal force and effect, and that nothing short of a specific description of the various articles mortgaged can avail a mortgagee relying upon a recorded mortgage, and the possession remaining with the mortgagor. No direct authorities are…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Short & Co. v. Trabue & Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1863
- Bond v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mott v. JohnsonWashington Supreme Court · 1920