Howe v. Handley
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
At the trial of this action many papers were read in evidence, and some depositions. After the reading was finished, the parties agreed, that the Court, upon this testimony, or so much thereof as should be legally admissible, should be authorized to decide upon the rights of the parties, and to make up and enter judgment accordingly. The facts, found by the Court to be admissible and material, are stated in the opinion. The arguments were in writing.
Read the full summary
At the trial of this action many papers were read in evidence, and some depositions. After the reading was finished, the parties agreed, that the Court, upon this testimony, or so much thereof as should be legally admissible, should be authorized to decide upon the rights of the parties, and to make up and enter judgment accordingly. The facts, found by the Court to be admissible and material, are stated in the opinion. The arguments were in writing. The property replevied, had been attached by plaintiff, a deputy sheriff, on a writ, Call v. Harrington, in which action, judgment was recovered…
1Opinion of the Court
Shepley J.
— This suit is upon a replevin bond. The plaintiff, as a deputy of the sheriff, by virtue of a writ in favor of Moses Call against William P. Harrington, attached a horse, sleigh, harness, and two buffalo robes, as the property of Harrington. The plaintiff in that suit, recovered judgment in the month of April, 1842. Before that attachment was made, Harrington, on March 5, 1841, had conveyed the same property in mortgage to William Legg and William Knowlton, who replevied it from the officer, and the bond now in suit was made by the defendants to the plaintiff, then defendant in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In re CookU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1842