Lucas v. Birdsey
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Replevin, to recover possession of a horse unlawfully detained; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Hart-. ford County, and tried, on an issue closed to the court, before Briscoe, J. The following facts were found by the court and made a part of the record. The plaintiff at the time the present suit was brought was, and for six years had been, a resident of Berlin, in Hartford County.
Read the full summary
Replevin, to recover possession of a horse unlawfully detained; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Hart-. ford County, and tried, on an issue closed to the court, before Briscoe, J. The following facts were found by the court and made a part of the record. The plaintiff at the time the present suit was brought was, and for six years had been, a resident of Berlin, in Hartford County. The defendant then was, and for several years had been, a resident of Meriden, in New Haven County, where Charles Lucas, a son of the plaintiff, also resided. On the 12th of April, 1873, Charles Lucas owned…
1Opinion of the CourtPhelps, J.
The policy of our law forbids the retention by the vendor of the possession of personal chattels after a sale, and, except as between the parties, makes such retention very strong, if not indeed conclusive, evidence of a colorable sale. An attaching creditor in a suit against the vendor may disregard such sale and take the property, if still in the possession of the vendor after the vendee has • under the circumstances had reasonable time and opportunity to take possession.
The plaintiff in error claims that the facts in this case bring it within the above stated familiar principle, but in our…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Central Loan & Trust Co. v. Campbell Commission Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897
- McIver v. Williamson-Halsell-Frasier Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1907
- Capron v. PorterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1876
- Hull v. HullSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1880