Legal Opinion

Martin v. Ray

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 17, 1823PublishedCited by 4 opinions

ERROR to the Dearborn Circuit Court. — W. Ray was the plaintiff below, and Marlin and Johnson the defendants.

1Opinion of the CourtBlackford, J.

Replevin. The defendants avow the taking, because the goods were the property of one A. Ray, against whom one of them had a judgment, and the other an execution as a constable; and they say actio non, because the property of the goods was in A. Ray, and not in the plaintiff General demurrer to the plea, and judgment for the plaintiff.

The defendants, in this case, have improperly- crowded Into *292their defence two distinct grounds for resisting the plaintiff’s suit. The one is a justification, because of a judgment and execution against a third person, said to be the owner of the goods. The othér…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Noble v. EpperlyIndiana Supreme Court · 1855
  2. Simcoke v. FrederickIndiana Supreme Court · 1848
  3. Hall v. HenlineIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
  4. Williams v. KesslerIndiana Supreme Court · 1882

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

Powered by the Exa API