McHugh v. Curtis
Michigan Supreme Court
.Error to Kent. Replevin for a team and harness owned by plaintiff and used by her for the support of her family, but seized on an execution against her during her absence in Canada, where she had gone with intent to take up her residence. Thi& action was brought against the execution purchaser and was referred to a referee who found for defendant. On exceptions to his report, judgment was entered for plaintiff in the circuit court.
1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.
If Mrs. McHugh was supporting her family or contributing thereto by the employment of the team which is now in dispute, she had the same privilege to hold it exempt from execution that any man would have had under similar circumstances. The exemption laws are not made for one sex only, but are general in their benefits; and a woman whose business is of the humblest and most limited character, is as much entitled to their privileges as one who is a farmer or shop-keeper.
But the difficulty in this case is, that the referee finds a& a fact that Mrs. McHugh, at the time the team was taken in. *263exec…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Wood v. BresnahanMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Memphis & Little Rook Ry. v. AdamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1885
- Leonetti v. ToltonMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
- Boyle v. WalshMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Kelson v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.