Levy v. Woodcock
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
.Replevin, for ten cases of merchandise. The plaintiffs are assignees of Clarence B. Frost, under the insolvent laws of Massachusetts. The defendants were defaulted, and William A. Stone, being admitted by the court to defend, pleaded that the goods were not the property of the plaintiffs, but were his goods.
Read the full summary
.Replevin, for ten cases of merchandise. The plaintiffs are assignees of Clarence B. Frost, under the insolvent laws of Massachusetts. The defendants were defaulted, and William A. Stone, being admitted by the court to defend, pleaded that the goods were not the property of the plaintiffs, but were his goods. The plaintiffs’ evidence tended to show that Stone and Frost obtained the goods by means of a fraudulent conspiracy, the plan of which was, that Frost should pretend to buy from Stone a large stock of old and shop-worn goods which Stone had in a store at Clinton, Mass., and go to…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Third persons are not admitted to defend in a suit as a matter of right. They are only admitted to prevent an unjust diversion of property, or some other wrong. Reynolds v. Damrell, 19 N. H. 394, 397; Kimball v. Wellington, 20 N. H. 439; Clough v. Curtis, 62 N. H. —. In Reynolds v. Damrell, supra, the motion of a subsequent attaching creditor to quash the writ for defect in mere form was denied. In Kimball v. Wellington, supra, a subsequent attaching creditor was not allowed to file a plea in abatement at the second term, although that was the first term he appeared. In Clough v. Curtis,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Jodoin v. BaroodySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1948
- Crippen v. RogersSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1892
- Carpenter v. Fisher A.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1896