Miller v. Adamson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Replevin for two horses, brought in the district court for Hennepin county. At the trial before Rea, J., the jury found for plaintiff, and assessed the value of the property at $175. The defendants jointly appeal from an order denying their joint motion for a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
In replevin, the plaintiff is not required to plead specially the source of his title, or the particular facts which entitle him to the possession of the property. He may allege generally that he is the owner and entitled to the immediate possession, and, under that, prove any right of property, general .or special, that entitles him to such possession. In replevin, the term “owner” does not necessarily import general or absolute ownership. The action being one for the possession, it is what may be called the “possessory title” that is important. Hence, under the general allegation in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Guthrie v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
3Cited by17 opinions
- Mayes v. StephensOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Williams v. AsheCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Bathke v. KrassinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- McArthur v. ClarkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- First National Bank v. SteersIdaho Supreme Court · 1904
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.