Cassidy v. Holbrook
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions. This was an action of replevin for property exceeding twenty dollars in value, alleged in tlie writ, to liave been detained by the defendant at Milo, Piscataquis county. The writ was made returnable and entered in tbis court, in Penobscot county.
Read the full summary
On exceptions. This was an action of replevin for property exceeding twenty dollars in value, alleged in tlie writ, to liave been detained by the defendant at Milo, Piscataquis county. The writ was made returnable and entered in tbis court, in Penobscot county. The defendant appeared and seasonably filed the following plea in abatement :■— And now, on the first day of the term, the said defendant comes and defends, &e., when &c., and pi-ays judgment of the writ in the above entitled action, because be says that the value of the goods to be replevied, and in said writ described, exceeded…
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
Dilatory pleas are allowed because sometimes useful, and promotive of justice. Put, for the reason that they are often resorted to for inequitable purposes, the law does not favor them. Therefore, they are to be very strictly construed. And the rule of strictness is general, applying to all cases. The rule really imposes no hardship. Air attorney may preserve all his client’s most technical rights by attention to the customary and well known forms and precedents.
In the case at bar, property, which was detained in Piscataquis county, was wrongfully replevied on process returnable in Penobscot…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Osgood v. City of LynnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881