Legal Opinion

Galen v. . Brown

New York Court of Appeals

Decided September 5, 1860PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from a j udgment of the Supreme Court. The action was to recover the possession of a quantity of lumber sawed out for doors, sash and blinds, and a quantity of lumber not sawed, &c. The defendants answered, justifying under an attachment issued by a justice of the peace to Brown, as a constable, against the property of one John W. Marrion on the application of the defendant Bucldand.

Read the full summary

Appeal from a j udgment of the Supreme Court. The action was to recover the possession of a quantity of lumber sawed out for doors, sash and blinds, and a quantity of lumber not sawed, &c. The defendants answered, justifying under an attachment issued by a justice of the peace to Brown, as a constable, against the property of one John W. Marrion on the application of the defendant Bucldand. On the trial these facts appeared: In April and May, 1855, John W. Marrion was engaged in the business of manufacturing doors, windows, sash and blinds, occupying a shop in Buckland’s buildings, located on…

1Opinion of the Court

To refuse to nonsuit for any of the reasons suggested at the circuit, was not error. The chattel mortgage of the plaintiffs, it was conceded, covered the property in controversy; and the evidence tended strongly to show the mortgagees in possession, when the defendants assumed to take it under the attachment. If the mortgagees had reduced the property to their possession, as the instrument empowered them to do, at the time the attachment was levied, Marrion had no interest in it subject to levy and sale. It is only when default has not occurred and the mortgagor is in possession, and is…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hall v. . SampsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
  2. Sanford v. Duluth & Dakota Elevator Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Eddy, Fenner & Co. v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1862
  4. In re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of StoneNew York Surrogate's Court · 1895
  5. Blyth & Fargo Co. v. HoutzUtah Supreme Court · 1901

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API