Odiorne v. Colley
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Mere naked possession, without some kind of property, will not enable a person to maintain trover. ‘To constitute a valid attachment of personal estate, it must be taken into the possession, or be placed under the control of the officer. While such an attachment subsists, the property cannot be duly attached by another officer; but a second attachment should, in sueh case, be made by the first officer.
Read the full summary
Mere naked possession, without some kind of property, will not enable a person to maintain trover. ‘To constitute a valid attachment of personal estate, it must be taken into the possession, or be placed under the control of the officer. While such an attachment subsists, the property cannot be duly attached by another officer; but a second attachment should, in sueh case, be made by the first officer. If the property has been delivered to a receipter, and he assent to the doings of the second officer, the second attachment is still invalid. This was trover for a quantity of merchandize. The…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodbdrv, J.
Though possession alone will sometimes enable a party to maintain trespass ; yet trover will not lie without evidence of property in the plaintiff. 1 Chitt. Pl. 150.—2 Saund. 47.—1 N. H. Rep. 110.—11 John. 529—13 John. 289.—14 John. 352.—15 John. 207.
Because in trespass, if the plaintiff had only the naked custody of the articles, he ought not to be disturbed in it by any body but the owner ; and hence may recover for the mere injury to his possession against a wrong doer. While in trover, which is not predicated on a disturbance of the possession of the plaintiff, but on a conversion of his…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stewart v. DoughtyNew York Supreme Court · 1812
3Cited by3 opinions
- Moore v. GravesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1826
- Dunklee v. FalesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1831
- Morse v. HurdSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1845