Pratt v. Chase
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Hathaway, J. presiding. Replevin, for 8000 box shooks. Defendant justified the taking of them, as a coroner, there being no sheriff of the county at that time, on several writs of attachment, against Daniel O. Wight, and also as holding them under direction of mortgagees of the same property.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Hathaway, J. presiding. Replevin, for 8000 box shooks. Defendant justified the taking of them, as a coroner, there being no sheriff of the county at that time, on several writs of attachment, against Daniel O. Wight, and also as holding them under direction of mortgagees of the same property. Plaintiffs claimed title under a contract of sale with one Wainwright, a bill of sale of 10,000 shooks, and receipt by Mm of payment by note, which papers appear in the opinion. Plaintiffs lived in Boston, and at the time of the sale the shooks were not manufactured.…
1Opinion of the CourtAppleton, J.
On Sept. 6, 1853, Henry C. Wainwright gave the plaintiffs the following contract of sale: —
“Sold Pratt & Townsend ten thousand full inch shooks of usual dimensions and regular thickness, to be bright and newly made, at 50cts., 6 mo’s, with interest added. Shooks to be delivered at Calais, Maine.
“Henry C. Wainwright.
“Boston, Sept. 6, 1853.”
*272At the same time, he gave the plaintiff a bill of the shooks, as follows: —
“Boston, September 6, 1853.. “ Messrs. Pratt & Townsend,
“Bought of II. O. Wainwright, 10,000 sugar box shooks, first' quality; equal to
cash, at 50cts., $5000-
“Received of Pratt &…
2Cited by3 opinions
- John Thallon & Co. v. Edsil Trading Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1951
- John Thallon & Co. v. Edsil Trading Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Kelsea v. HainesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860