Sayward v. Warren
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Replevin for a quantity of hay. With the general issue, non cepit, the defendant filed the following brief statement: — And for brief statement the defendant says, that he did not take said property as alleged, that at the time said property was replevied he did not have the same in his possession, or claim to own the same, but had previously parted with all his right, title and interest therein. —And further, that at the time said plaintiffs sued out their writ, they had no…
Read the full summary
Replevin for a quantity of hay. With the general issue, non cepit, the defendant filed the following brief statement: — And for brief statement the defendant says, that he did not take said property as alleged, that at the time said property was replevied he did not have the same in his possession, or claim to own the same, but had previously parted with all his right, title and interest therein. —And further, that at the time said plaintiffs sued out their writ, they had no interest in said property nor ever since have had. — And further, that said property by said plaintiffs replevied, to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up and delivered June 30, 1848, by
WhitmaN C. J.
This is an action of replevin, to which the defendant pleads the general issue, non cepit; and files a brief statement under the statute, setting forth, among other things, that he was not in possession of the property replevied, nor claimed to own the same at the time it was replevied from him; and the ruling of the Court appears to have been, that, if such was the case, the action was not maintainable; and to this the plaintiff took exceptions.
The first obvious remark to be made is, that such a plea, for such…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ilsley v. StubbsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Chapman v. AndrewsNew York Supreme Court · 1829
3Cited by1 opinion
- Helman v. WithersIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892