Legal Opinion

Kittridge v. Miller

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1881PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to St. Clair. Replevin. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

Kittridge sued Miller in replevin for the skin of a fox, which he claimed because the animal was first started and wounded by him, and chased to earth by his dog, and finally caught by the dog and killed by his help. As there is no evidence whatever tending to show that Miller had or claimed any interest in, or control over, the skin, there was no ground for an action of replevin, and we shall not discuss the respective interests of the several men and dogs that killed the fox.

This case, which involved only one dollar and a half, was brought in the circuit court, and not before a justice.…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Caldwell v. BowenMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Depriest v. McKinstryNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Kirby Carpenter Co. v. TrombleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Berndt v. Ionia Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Eldred v. WoolaverMichigan Supreme Court · 1881

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API