Bevan v. Hayden
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Dubuque District Court. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. 1. That plaintiff did not belong to one of the classes of persons entitled to an exemption of a wagon, under § 3304 of the Revision of 1860. 2. That as the defendant had two wagons, the one for which he had a team was exempt,'if either. 3. That by consenting to the attachment of the wagon in controversy, he waived his right of exemption.
1Opinion of the CourtLowe, J.
— Replevin to recover the possession of a two-horse wagon, which had been seized under an attachment at the suit of one McDonald, by defendant, then sheriff of said county; but which the plaintiff claimed fell within the class or description of property which, under the Statute, was exempt from levy. On a trial thereof the plaintiff’s claim was sustained, and the court, after overruling a motion for a new trial, rendered in his behalf a judgment for the property.
The bill of exceptions certifies all the evidence adduced on the trial, the instructions given and refused, as well as the grounds…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Grimes v. MartinSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
3Cited by18 opinions
- Matter of HahnUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Iowa · 1980
- Morgan v. RountreeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893
- Kaiser v. SeatonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883
- Reynolds v. HainesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1891
- Alt v. Lafayette BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1880
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.