Shaw v. Thompson
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
This was a writ of replevin for a horse, and the defendant, in his avowry, justified the taking, as sheriff of the county, by virtue of a writ of mesne process against one Alanson Shaw, whose property it was alleged to be. The plea to the avowry denied that the property was in Alanson Shaw, but alleged that it was in the plaintiff, Asa Shaw, and upon this, issue was taken.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of replevin for a horse, and the defendant, in his avowry, justified the taking, as sheriff of the county, by virtue of a writ of mesne process against one Alanson Shaw, whose property it was alleged to be. The plea to the avowry denied that the property was in Alanson Shaw, but alleged that it was in the plaintiff, Asa Shaw, and upon this, issue was taken. At the trial it appeared by the plaintiff’s evidence that in March, 1858, Alanson Shaw was the owner of the horse, which was three years old, subject to a mortgage to one Currier for the purchase money due from Alanson for…
1Opinion of the CourtNesmith, J.
Chancellor Kent lays down the rule, “ That, whore there was a voluntary sale of chattels, absolute or contingent, with an agreement in or out of the deed, that the vendor may keep possession, or if possession be kept without any agreement, except in special cases, and for special reasons to be shown to and approved by the court, it is fraudulent and void against creditors.” Jennings v. Carter, 2 Wend. 446; Stevens v. Fiske, 19 Wend. 181; 20 Wend. 548; Camp v. Camp, 20 Wend. 628; 6 Hill 433.
Chief Justice Marshall, in Edwards v. Harben, says, that an unconditional sale, where jjossession did…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hamilton v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Clinkinbeard v. ClinkinbeardCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
- Jennings v. Carter & WilcoxNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Ferris v. DouglassNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Jordan v. TurnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1833
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.