Legal Opinion

Clark v. Washburn

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided March 15, 1837PublishedCited by 2 opinions

This was an action of trover for one pair of horses. On the trial, the plaintiff proved that on the 10th day of Nov. 1835, a writ was sued out'by McLean & Wallace against Sidney Patterson, signed by a justice of the peace, directed to the sheriff of Washington county, his deputy, &c. This writ the plaintiff was, by said justice, duly authorized to serve, by an indorsement thereon, agreeably to the statute.

Read the full summary

This was an action of trover for one pair of horses. On the trial, the plaintiff proved that on the 10th day of Nov. 1835, a writ was sued out'by McLean & Wallace against Sidney Patterson, signed by a justice of the peace, directed to the sheriff of Washington county, his deputy, &c. This writ the plaintiff was, by said justice, duly authorized to serve, by an indorsement thereon, agreeably to the statute. On said 10th day of Nov. 1835, the plaintiff served said writ, at Cabot, in the county of Caledonia, by attaching-the horses now in question ; and he put said horses into the possession of…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Collamer, J.

The first question arising in this case relates to the authority of the plaintiff, to attach the property. In relation to this the court are not unanimous in opinion, but a majority of the Judges, present, are of opinion that the plaintiff bad legal and sufficient authority to serve the writ of attachment, as the same was served by him. The next question relates to the lien being kept and retained upon the property on the debt of *308McLean and Wallace. The statute provides, (Yol. 1. p. 88. Sec. 33.) “ Where the goods or chattels of any person…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Stewart v. MartinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844
  2. Goodrich v. ChurchSupreme Court of Vermont · 1848

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

Powered by the Exa API