Spikes v. Burgess
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Winnebago County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Cassodat: “ Tbe defendant, as sheriff, seized the plaintiff’s ‘ hearse ’ upon an execution against him. The plaintiff replevied the same on the ground that it was exempt. At the close of the testimony on the trial, the court directed the usual verdict in such cases for the plaintiff. Erom the judgment entered thereon the defendant appeals.”
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Winnebago County. The case is thus stated by Mr. Justice Cassodat: “ Tbe defendant, as sheriff, seized the plaintiff’s ‘ hearse ’ upon an execution against him. The plaintiff replevied the same on the ground that it was exempt. At the close of the testimony on the trial, the court directed the usual verdict in such cases for the plaintiff. Erom the judgment entered thereon the defendant appeals.” The meaning of the terms or words in question must be determined by their ordinary and familiar signification, as shown by authorities appointed, or of acknowledged…
1Opinion of the CourtCassodat, J.
The statutes of this state exempting certain property of the debtor from forced sale on execution were enacted under a constitutional mandate. Sec. 17, art. I, Const. Accordingly they have .uniformly been liberally *430construed by this court. This rule of construction must be adhered to. There is no controversy as to the facts. The simple question presented is "whether a “ hearse ” may be exempt from “seizure or sale on execution” against the owner. The particular clause of the statute invoked by the plaintiff is that which gave him the privilege of holding as exempt “ one wagon, cart, or dray,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Knapp v. BartlettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
- Humphrey v. TaylorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re ZimmermanDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1913