Legal Opinion

Wakeman v. Barrows

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 2, 1879PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to Genesee. [Replevin. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the Court

Marston, JT.

Barrows, claiming title as assignee of Wright & Wakeman, for the benefit of their creditors, brought replevin for certain goods held by Wakeman under a chattel mortgage given by the assignors, and turned out by them to the representative of the mortgagee the day previous to the assignment. The assignment described the mortgaged goods and added that they were “under conditional chattel mortgage to A. Wakeman, deceased, and now in their possession.”

It is wholly unnecessary to discuss the various questions raised in reference to the validity and filing of this mortgage. There is one…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Millar v. BabcockMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
  2. Voorhies v. FrisbieMichigan Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Francisco v. AguirreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Housel v. CremerNebraska Supreme Court · 1882
  3. Schaller v. WrightSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
  4. A. Einstein's Sons v. ShouseSupreme Court of Florida · 1888
  5. Heineman v. HartMichigan Supreme Court · 1884

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API