Beach v. Schmultz
Illinois Supreme Court
This was an action of replevin for a cargo of lumber, (one hundred thousand feet, more or less), brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error, on the 3rd day of October, A. D. 1856, returnable to the October term, A. D. 1856, of the Cook Circuit Court.
Read the full summary
This was an action of replevin for a cargo of lumber, (one hundred thousand feet, more or less), brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiffs in error, on the 3rd day of October, A. D. 1856, returnable to the October term, A. D. 1856, of the Cook Circuit Court. The affidavit on which the writ issued was made by the defendant, and filed in the court below on the 3rd day of October, 1856, and sets out in substance, that said Schmultz was the owner of a cargo of pine lumber, which was-shipped from Green Bay to Chicago, on the schooner “Main,” to said Schmultz, and that he is justly…
1Opinion of the CourtBreese, J.
Several questions are presented by this case, and the first is as to the affidavit made by Schmultz, the plaintiff below, on which to obtain a writ of replevin. It is in substance as the statute requires—it sufficiently describes the property, and has all the necessary averments.
The objections to the deposition of Oscar Gray are not tenable either as to his first or second deposition.
It is not true that a party has to apply for leave to the court to retake a deposition. The statute does not require it, nor is such the practice. A dedimus potestatem issues by the clerk, without any application…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Claflin & Co. v. Continental Jersey WorksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
- Reiss v. HanchettIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- Moore v. BowmanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1867
- Reed v. MoffattIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
- United States v. Two Hundred & Seventy-Eight Barrels of Distilled SpiritsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1869
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.