Legal Opinion

Heyman v. Covell

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 13, 1880Published

Error to Kent. Replevin. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

Mrs. Heyman, the plaintiff, sued defendant in replevin for certain goods which, as we understand the finding, the court below held were unlawfully taken from her by defendant, but nevertheless gave judgment in his favor. Defendant at the time the goods were replevied held them as Hnited States Deputy Marshal, under an execution issued from the Circuit Court of the Hnited States for the western district of Michigan, against one Adolph Heyman who was plaintiff’s husband. There are no legal conclusions set out in the finding, and there are some facts set out which would seem to indicate that…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Freeman v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1861
  2. Buck v. ColbathSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
  3. Slocum v. MayberrySupreme Court of the United States · 1817
  4. Van Norden v. MortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  5. Carew v. MatthewsMichigan Supreme Court · 1879

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API