Litchfield v. Halligan
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Webster Circuit Cowrt. This is an action of replevin for seven hundred and forty-new oak fence posts, of which plaintiff alleges he is the absolute and unqualified owner, and which, he avers, the defendant wrongfully detains from plaintiff, the alleged cause of detention being that defendant cut the posts on section 1, township 88, range 29, the premises of plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Webster Circuit Cowrt. This is an action of replevin for seven hundred and forty-new oak fence posts, of which plaintiff alleges he is the absolute and unqualified owner, and which, he avers, the defendant wrongfully detains from plaintiff, the alleged cause of detention being that defendant cut the posts on section 1, township 88, range 29, the premises of plaintiff. Plaintiff alleges that the posts are of the value of ten cents each, and that he has sustained damage by the wrongful detention, in the sum of one hundred dollars. A writ of replevin was issued to the sheriff of…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
reading replevin I. The court instructed the jury as follows: “The plaintiff claims three hundred and eighty-four posts, which he avers the defendant cut upon his premises described as section 1, township 88, range 29, in this county. The real question in dispute is, whether the posts claimed in this action in plaintiff's petition were cut by the defendant upon the plaintiffs land above described. If they were, your verdict will be for the plaintiff, if not, for the defendant; and it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to establish the proposition — . that is, that they were cut, by a…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Gardner v. Builders Material Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1920