Bucklin v. Crampton
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trover for a quantity of hay. The case was referred, under a rule from the county court, and the referee reported the facts substantially as follows. The plaintiff claimed title to the hay in question by virtue of four-several attachments, all made September 13, 1841, by the plaintiff, as officer, against one David W. Philips, who was the owner of the hay at the time the attachments were made.
Read the full summary
Trover for a quantity of hay. The case was referred, under a rule from the county court, and the referee reported the facts substantially as follows. The plaintiff claimed title to the hay in question by virtue of four-several attachments, all made September 13, 1841, by the plaintiff, as officer, against one David W. Philips, who was the owner of the hay at the time the attachments were made. Judgments were rendered in favor of the plaintiffs in the several suits, and the property attached was duly charged in execution. When the hay was attached, it was in a barn on premises then in the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Hall, J.
Upon the attachment of hay, and certain other articles of property difficult to remove, the statute allows the officer, as a substitute for taking the possession of it, to leave copies of the process and of his return in the town clerk’s office; and those copies operate as notice of the attachment to all persons. Rev. Stat., chap. 18., sec. 15. The objection in this case is, not that the copies in the town clerk’s office did not give the defendant proper notice of the attachments; but that the copies were variant from the originals, and that in…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Pond v. BakerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1885
- Pond v. BakerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
- Humphrey v. WheelerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1918
- Scott v. Manchester Print WorksSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860