McArthur v. Lane
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
RepleviN for a quantity of board logs. The plea in abatement was filed at the term at which the action was entered; the demurrer was put in at the next succeeding term; and the suggestion for a return was made at the next law term, when the case stood for argument. The case is sufficiently understood from the opinion of the Court. cited Gould v. Barnard, 3 Mass. R. 301. cited Quincy v. Hall, 1 Pick. 360.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Shepley J. -
'The plea in abatement, alleges the property at the time of taking to have been jointly in the plaintiff and another. The objection to the plea is, that it would be sufficient for the plaintiff to prove property in himself at the time of suing out the writ. But the settled rule seems to be, that it must be at the time of the taking. Co. Lit. 145, b. As the property was then in the plaintiff and another, the plea in abatement is good. Hart v. Fitzgerald, 2 Mass. R. 509.
The plea contains no prayer for a return of the property; but a petition…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- First Massachusetts Turnpike Corp. v. FieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Hart v. FitzgeraldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
3Cited by4 opinions
- Collamer v. PageSupreme Court of Vermont · 1862
- Kelley v. VandiverMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Ingals v. FergusonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Vermont Loan & Trust Co. v. CardinWashington Supreme Court · 1898