Straw v. Straw
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trover. Heard on the report of a referee at the December Term, 1895, Lamoille County, Start, J., presiding. Judgment for tbe plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The right of the administrators under their reservation was only to enter and take. The defendant was not bound to deliver. His refusal was not a conversion.
Read the full summary
Trover. Heard on the report of a referee at the December Term, 1895, Lamoille County, Start, J., presiding. Judgment for tbe plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The right of the administrators under their reservation was only to enter and take. The defendant was not bound to deliver. His refusal was not a conversion. There was no conveyance to the plaintiff by his co-administrator, and his right, if any, was obtained by some sort of a trade between himself, the defendant and other claimants against the estate. He does not stand upon the joint title reserved in the deed, and consequently the…
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, C. J.
The defendant controverts the plaintiff’s right to recover for the water wheel and the main shafting connecting it with the starch factory machinery. These were pnt in by Thomas A. Straw who owned the equity of redemption of the premises. The plaintiff does not contend that while thus situated the water wheel and main shafting did not become fixtures, under the decisions of this court, and were covered by the mortgage then owned by W. H. H. Bingham. After the decease of Thomas A. Straw, his administrators did not intend to redeem the factory. Mr. Bingham thereupon sold his interest in the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Powers v. DennisonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Sterling v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1869
- Judevine v. GoodrichSupreme Court of Vermont · 1861
- Noble v. SylvesterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1869
3Cited by3 opinions
- Reader v. ChristianCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921
- Continental Gin Co. v. De BordSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Reader v. ChristianCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921