King Shoe Co. v. Chittenden

Plaintiff in error brought replevin against Webb, as sheriff, for shoes held under writs of attachment and execution against Estes. The defense, title in Estes.

On trial a deposition tendered by plaintiff was excluded, and a nonsuit entered. Plaintiff says the rejection of the deposition was error. This defendant denies, and further contends the ruling was without prejudice, because with the deposition in, plaintiff had no case.

The facts pertinent are : Estes ordered shoes of plaintiff, *442then countermanded the order. Through some misunderstanding, the goods were shipped, reaching the business…