Johnson v. Lang
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Trover, for a wagon, a tool of the plaintiff’s occupation, attached by the defendant, a constable, upon a writ against the plaintiff in favor of one Churchill. Facts found by a referee, and ease transferred from the October term, 1901, of the superior court by Pike, J. At the time of the attachment the plaintiff objected to it on the ground that the defendant had no right to interfere with the United States mail.
Read the full summary
Trover, for a wagon, a tool of the plaintiff’s occupation, attached by the defendant, a constable, upon a writ against the plaintiff in favor of one Churchill. Facts found by a referee, and ease transferred from the October term, 1901, of the superior court by Pike, J. At the time of the attachment the plaintiff objected to it on the ground that the defendant had no right to interfere with the United States mail. Shortly after the attachment and prior to the sale, the defendant and Churchill’s attorney at different times-told the plaintiff that he could take the wagon if he claimed it as…
1Opinion of the CourtRemick, J.
It is found as a fact that the wagon in question was a tool of the plaintiff’s occupation. Sail v. Kelson, 59 N. H. 573. It was therefore exempt (P. S., c. 220, s. 2, cl. IX), and the attachment was unlawful. Under these circumstances the plaintiff was not bound, even at the defendant’s suggestion, to go .and take the wagon or lose his remedy. Nor was he bound at once to ascertain and specifically define and demand his rights, on ;pain of forfeiture.
The case is not like those where the exemption was an alternative one, and where, from the circumstances, a duty of election or .selection rested…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dow v. CheneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
3Cited by1 opinion
- Flaxman v. Capitol City Press, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1936