Conely v. Dudley
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Erazer, J. Replevin by Clarence Conely and another against Harlan J. Dudley and another. From a judgment for defendants on verdict directed by the court, plaintiffs bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
The plaintiffs were in possession of certain lumber, claiming title, when it was taken by the defendants upon an attachment against the Mascotte Lumber Company. Plaintiffs brought replevin, and, after proof of the above facts and the value of the property, the court directed a verdict for the defendants, and the plaintiffs removed the cause to this court by writ of error.
Plaintiffs’ proof of possession under a claim of purchase from the true owner, and the forcible taking of the lumber without consent, made out a prima facie case. Van Baalen v. Dean, 27 Mich. 104; Rose v. Eaton, 77 Mich. 255.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Alberts v. Village of VernonMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Johnson v. BallouMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Van Baalen v. DeanMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Rose v. EatonMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Upham v. CaldwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by8 opinions
- Jackson Bridge & Iron Co. v. Lancashire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Wolfe v. StackMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Sanford v. MillikinMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Dudley v. ConelyMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
- Marx v. SchultzMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.