Briggs v. McEwen
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Harrison District Court. — -Hon. C. H. Lewis, Judge. This is an action to recover a certain team of horses, the plaintiff alleging that he was the absolute and unqualified owner thereof by purchase; that the defendant wrongfully detained the same from him, claiming to have purchased the same from plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Harrison District Court. — -Hon. C. H. Lewis, Judge. This is an action to recover a certain team of horses, the plaintiff alleging that he was the absolute and unqualified owner thereof by purchase; that the defendant wrongfully detained the same from him, claiming to have purchased the same from plaintiff. The defendant answered, denying generally, and alleging that he had purchased the team, and took possession thereof under delivery made to him by the plaintiff, and that thereafter, and before the commencement of this suit, he was garnished at the suit of S. N. Dale v. C. I.…
1Opinion of the CourtGiven, C. J.
I. The main question to be determined in this case was whether the sale was upon condition that title should not pass to the defendant until payment was made, or, in the language of the special interrogatory submitted to the jury: . “Was the sale of the team in controversy made on condition that cash was to be paid before title passed ?” The jury answered this special, interrogatory in the • affirmative, — an answer which is fully sustained by the evidence.
2. replevin • defendant not in possession • evidence. 2. sale • con- ' garnishment of vendee. II. There was no error in refusing the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clark v. RallsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
3Cited by7 opinions
- Liddle v. SalterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Malone v. MooreSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Helman v. WithersIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892
- Miles v. SchrunkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Armstrong v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Iowa · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.