Kendall v. Samson
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass for taking a horse. Plea, the general issue, and notice. On the trial in the county court, the following facts were established. The plaintiff had purchased the horse in question, in October, 1837, of one Andrew P. Walcott, and, after keeping it some few days or weeks, put it upon a farm which he had recently purchased, his title being upon record.
Read the full summary
Trespass for taking a horse. Plea, the general issue, and notice. On the trial in the county court, the following facts were established. The plaintiff had purchased the horse in question, in October, 1837, of one Andrew P. Walcott, and, after keeping it some few days or weeks, put it upon a farm which he had recently purchased, his title being upon record. Walcott had been in possession of the farm for some time previous to plaintiff’s purchase, and continued to reside upon it until after the defendant attached the colt as the property of said Walcott. Walcott carried on some portion of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Bennett, I.
— Whatever fluctuations there may have been in the decisions of the courts of our sister States, with us there has been but one course of decisions. Upon the sale of a chattel, we have required a substantial, visible change of the possession, and one which is exclusive in the vendee; otherwise the sale is void as against the creditors of the vendor. The possession of this horse, after the sale, seems to have been concurrent, in the vendor and vendee down to the time of the attachment by Claggett in March, 1839. After this attachment by the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Golden v. CockrilSupreme Court of Kansas · 1862
- Clute v. SteeleNevada Supreme Court · 1871
- Leavitt v. JonesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1882
- Enright v. DodgeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1892
- Ward v. CampSupreme Court of Vermont · 1893
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.