Perrin v. Leverett
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Trespass for forcibly entering the plaintiff’s pew, No. 82, in the meeting-house situated in Chauncy Place. Tn a case stated by the parties, for the consideration of the Court, the defendant admits the force, &c., as alleged in the plaintiff’s declaration ; but justifies, on the ground of the property in the pew being at the time in himself.
Read the full summary
Trespass for forcibly entering the plaintiff’s pew, No. 82, in the meeting-house situated in Chauncy Place. Tn a case stated by the parties, for the consideration of the Court, the defendant admits the force, &c., as alleged in the plaintiff’s declaration ; but justifies, on the ground of the property in the pew being at the time in himself. On the 17th of December, 1814, at 5 o’clock, P. M., Luke Baldwin, a deputy of the sheriff of the county of Suffolk, attached the pew in question, upon an original writ in favor of one Cutter, against the then owner of the pew, of which he made a due…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The attachment made by Bell, being prior in point of time to the other, the title of the defendant, which is derived under it, must prevail, if that attachment was valid. It is contended, on the part of the plaintiff, that it was not valid, because the officer did not enter the pew, or come in sight of it, or even enter the meeting-house. He came, however, to the meeting-house, which he found shut and locked. He did, in fact, all that was in his power ; and no negligence can be attributed to him. Shall the plaintiff, who came * afterwards, and who was fortunate enough to procure the key,…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Rodgers v. . BonnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Hancock v. HendersonTexas Supreme Court · 1876
- Shoonover v. Osborne Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1900
- Saunders v. Columbus Life & General InsuranceMississippi Supreme Court · 1871
- Rodgers v. BonnerNew York Supreme Court · 1869
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.