Weed v. Dayton
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Trespass on the case, against the defendant as a constable, for not having kept and produced certain household furniture attached by him in a suit of the plaintiff against one Fanny Ensworth, the plaintiff having recovered judgment in the suit and demand having been made on the defendant for the goods attached; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried to the court on the general issue, with notice that the property attached was by law exempt from…
Read the full summary
Trespass on the case, against the defendant as a constable, for not having kept and produced certain household furniture attached by him in a suit of the plaintiff against one Fanny Ensworth, the plaintiff having recovered judgment in the suit and demand having been made on the defendant for the goods attached; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried to the court on the general issue, with notice that the property attached was by law exempt from attachment. The court found the following facts: On the trial it was conceded that the only question in dispute was…
1Opinion of the CourtSeymour, C. J.
The property in dispute consists of articles of household furniture which belonged to Mrs. Ensworth. They were attached as hers by the defendant, a constable of Greenwich, at the suit of the plaintiff against her. The plaintiff in that suit recovered judgment and made due demand of the defendant for the attached property. That demand not being complied with, this action is brought, and on certain facts found by the Court of Common Pleas, is reserved for our advice.
It is conceded that if the property was liable to attachment, the plaintiff should recover the value of the articles so liable.
Mrs.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rogers v. KuhnreichMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Moore & Hill v. BucklerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1916