Kelly v. Hart
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of trover for two wagons and one horse. Plea, general issue, and trial by jury. On the trial in the county court, it was admitted that the defendant took the property, in question, by virtue of a writ of attachment in his favor against one James A, Parsons, The plaintiff, to show title in himself, offered to prove that the property had belonged to said Parsons, against whom one Charles Collins, the constable and collector of Colchester, had sundry.taxes…
Read the full summary
This was an action of trover for two wagons and one horse. Plea, general issue, and trial by jury. On the trial in the county court, it was admitted that the defendant took the property, in question, by virtue of a writ of attachment in his favor against one James A, Parsons, The plaintiff, to show title in himself, offered to prove that the property had belonged to said Parsons, against whom one Charles Collins, the constable and collector of Colchester, had sundry.taxes and rate bills, and, two executions in favor of sundry persons for collection, and in virtue of these and his authority…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redeield, J.
It is, at present, a well settled principle of the law of this state, that sales of personal chattels, unaccompanied by any visible, substantial change of possession, are inoperative, as against the creditors of the vendor. The cases of sheriffs’ sales have been considered an exception from the operation of this rule. It is not now necessary, and could not be useful, to go into the reasons of the exception. The cases upon that subject have followed in the track of Kidd v. Rawlinson, 2 B. & P. 59. The principal reasons there urged in favor…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Austin v. SouleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Fitzpatrick v. PeabodySupreme Court of Vermont · 1878
- Kerr v. BlaineMontana Supreme Court · 1914