Mauney v. . Ingram
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil AotioN, tried at Spring Term, 1876, of Montgom-ERY Superior Court, before Buxton, J. The plaintiff brought this action to recover possession of a gray mare belonging to his intestate, under the provisions of C. C. P. Title IX, Chapter 2, — Claim and Delivery of personal property.
Read the full summary
Civil AotioN, tried at Spring Term, 1876, of Montgom-ERY Superior Court, before Buxton, J. The plaintiff brought this action to recover possession of a gray mare belonging to his intestate, under the provisions of C. C. P. Title IX, Chapter 2, — Claim and Delivery of personal property. The defendant on demand of the plaintiff refused to deliver the mare, and in his answer, which admits the plaintiff’s property, sets up a claim for compensation for feeding and taking care of her for three years at. the price of $75 per year, and insists upon the right to retain her until his.charges are paid.…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, C. J.
(After státing the facts as above) The • question thus presented for our determination is as to the validity of the alleged lien for the defendant’s charges, and .-his right to retain possession until they are paid.
We are of opinion that the defendant has no such lien, -atid his withholding the property is a tort which entitl s the plaintiff to the redress he seeks. Tne doctrine of liens on personal property is- very clearly stated by Mr. Adams : “ A lien is a right to retain a personal chattel until a debt
• due the person retaining is satisfied, and it exists at com-ún on law, independently…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Davis v. Industrial Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
- State Ex Rel. Pate v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
- Rountree v. . Britt and VinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- Cummer Lumber Co. v. Seminole Phosphate Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925