How v. Taylor
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Si. Louis Circuit Court. There must have been “actual ” (that is not merely virtual or constructive,) and continued change of possession. (W. S., 281, § 10.) The California statute is ours precisely, as now amended.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Si. Louis Circuit Court. There must have been “actual ” (that is not merely virtual or constructive,) and continued change of possession. (W. S., 281, § 10.) The California statute is ours precisely, as now amended. (Compiled Laws of California, 201, § 15 ; Bacon vs. Scannell, 9 Cal., 271; Stevens vs. Irwin, 15 Cal., 503; Engle vs. Marshall, 19 Cal., 320,; Woods vs. Bugby, 29 Cal., 479; Claflin vs. Rosenberg, 42 Mo., 447.) There having been a bona fide sale by the owner, who was in a distant State, to plaintiff, of the paintings in dispute, then in the hands of a naked bailee, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Tories, Judge,
delivered the.opinion of the court.
The defendant, as Sheriff of St. Lous County, levied on and siezed, by virtue of an attachment in his hands against the property of John How, four pictures or paintings estimated to be of the. value of one thousand dollars. The plaintiff claimed to be the owner of the paintings, and brought this suit in the nature of a replevin suit to recover the same.
*593The defendant in his answer denied plaintiff’s right or title to the paintings, and charged that the paintings belonged to and were the property of John How, (plaintiff’s father) and justified…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Claflin v. RosenbergSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
3Cited by10 opinions
- Harmon v. MorrisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Halderman v. StillingtonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- Harrison v. FosterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- Lufkins v. CollinsIdaho Supreme Court · 1885
- Hamilton v. National Loan BankU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri · 1875
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.