Legal Opinion

Berry v. Hayden

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided April 4, 1859PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from the Dubuque District Court. The plaintiff brought replevin against the defendant, to, recover possession - of certain goods, which the defendant had attached as the property of Alexander & Co. The plaintiff claimed them by virtue of an assignment for the benefit of creditors, made by the firm of Alexander & Co. The defendant, who was the sheriff, and served the pro-, cess in the suit of certain creditors of Alexander & Co., contests the validity of the…

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Dubuque District Court. The plaintiff brought replevin against the defendant, to, recover possession - of certain goods, which the defendant had attached as the property of Alexander & Co. The plaintiff claimed them by virtue of an assignment for the benefit of creditors, made by the firm of Alexander & Co. The defendant, who was the sheriff, and served the pro-, cess in the suit of certain creditors of Alexander & Co., contests the validity of the assignment. On the trial, the. ■plaintiff offered the deed in evidence, which was objected to by defendant. The deed of assignment…

1Opinion of the CourtWoodward, J.

We desire to confine ourselves to the points, decided by the court below, but it is not clear whether that court based its ruling upon one or two grounds, of objection.. .The second assignment of causes of objection, embraces two grounds — the authority- to sell on credit, and that to compound. But immediately following this, the record says the court sustained the objection upon the last point above stated. This, properly,.is the power to compound, only. • As an error in this, on our part, in looking at but one of the objections, wrould send the case back, if we should differ from that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Wakeman v. GroverNew York Court of Chancery · 1832
  2. Murray v. CarothersCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1858
  3. Abercrombie v. BradfordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
  4. Ashurst v. MartinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1839
  5. Hart v. CraneNew York Court of Chancery · 1837

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sperry v. GallaherSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
  2. Wooster v. StanfieldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860

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

Powered by the Exa API