Legal Opinion

Roberts v. Denio

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1898PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Error to Sanilac; Beach, J. Replevin by William Roberts against George Denio. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, C. J.

Defendant was the treasurer of the village of Sanilac Center for the year 1897, and had a warrant for the collection of taxes, valid upon its face. He levied upon personal property to satisfy a tax assessed against the. plaintiff. Plaintiff brought this action of replevin, claiming the right to go behind the warrant and show the invalidity of the tax. The court entered judgment for the defendant. The suit is within the expressed prohibition of the statute, and cannot be maintained. 2 How. Stat. § 8318; Boyce v. Peterson, 84 Mich. 490; Curtiss v. Witt, 110 Mich. 131. This case is not within…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Curtiss v. WittMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Boyce v. PetersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Gow v. StoddardMichigan Supreme Court · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API