Beattie v. Hoyt
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from, Third District, Lewis and, Gla/rke County. This action was tried by Wade, C. J. The court below vested a title in respondent to the property in controversy, and erred in not placing appellant in the condition lie was in before the suit was commenced. Appellant was not voluntarily in court, and the buggy was in possession of respondent through the process of the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Third District, Lewis and, Gla/rke County. This action was tried by Wade, C. J. The court below vested a title in respondent to the property in controversy, and erred in not placing appellant in the condition lie was in before the suit was commenced. Appellant was not voluntarily in court, and the buggy was in possession of respondent through the process of the court. It had been taken from appellant by an officer of the law and delivered to respondent, who brought the action. The court below decided that respondent could not maintain his case, and'that he had no title to the…
1Opinion of the CourtBlaee, J.
The respondent commenced this action in the probate court to recover the possession of a buggy and obtained a judgment therefor. The appellant then appealed to the district court, anda jury was impaneled to try the cause, and the respondent testified. The following facts appear in his testimony. His claim to the possession of the property was based upon the purchase of a ticket which was delivered to him by the agent of the owner of the buggy. The respondent, having no money at the time, offered to give his check for the price of the ticket, but was told that he could pay for it at any time.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Franzman v. DaviesMontana Supreme Court · 1905
- Turnbull v. BrownMontana Supreme Court · 1953