Leavitt v. Shook
Oregon Supreme Court
From Baker: Samuel White, Judge. Replevin action by E. V. Leavitt against J. R. Shook, resulting in a judgment for defendant, from which plaintiff appeals.
1Per curiam
The judgment in this case will be affirmed. It is an action of replevin to recover possession of a certain mare, which the evidence for the plaintiff showed belonged to him, but had strayed from his place in 1893, and its whereabouts had been unknown to him until the spring of 1905, a few days before he commenced this action. The defendant claimed to have purchased the animal in good faith from George and H. J. Rizor in 1903; that the Rizors purchased her from one Frank Jones in good faith in 1896, believing he was the owner and had the right to sell; that they thereafter remained in the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Spooner v. HolmesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Steiner Bros. v. TranumSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Wells v. HalpinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Dee v. HylandUtah Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by7 opinions
- Archambeau v. EdmunsonOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Shelby v. ShanerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Havird v. LungIdaho Supreme Court · 1911
- Bennett v. MeekerMontana Supreme Court · 1921
- Trinity Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Heating Service & Installation Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1967
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.