Field v. Higgins
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Report from Nisi Prius, Rice, J., presiding. Forcible Entry and Detainer. The respondent owned a building, the upper part of which was used for the residence of a family^ and the lower part for a mechanic’s shop, standing upon land of one Holland. He employed the complainants to remove it to land of the Lewis-ton Water Power Company.
Read the full summary
On Report from Nisi Prius, Rice, J., presiding. Forcible Entry and Detainer. The respondent owned a building, the upper part of which was used for the residence of a family^ and the lower part for a mechanic’s shop, standing upon land of one Holland. He employed the complainants to remove it to land of the Lewis-ton Water Power Company. They accordingly removed it, having made upon it such trifling repairs as were necessary to fit it for the removal; after which they made such further repairs upon it as to fit it for occupation. For these services, charged at $37, they claimed a lien upon it.…
1Opinion of the CourtHathaway, J.
— Process for forcible entry and detainer of a building, which had been moved, by the defendant, on to the land of the Lewiston Water Power Company, where it was taken on execution, as the defendants’ personal property, and as such purchased by the plaintiffs, at the sheriff’s sale thereof, 19 July, 1851.
The first question presented by the case, is whether or not this process can bo maintained to recover possession of personal property.
If the building were not personal property, the plaintiffs acquired no title to it, by their purchase of the sheriff, for as such, acting under his statute…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Minnis v. Newbro-Gallogly Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1913