Wright v. Bennett
New York Supreme Court
Demurrer to plea. The action was replevin in the detinet. Plea in bar, that the property was the property of the plaintiff and two other persons, naming them, with a formal traverse of the property of the plaintiff. Demurrer and joinder.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court-,
AlleN, J.
The principle that in actions ex delicto ■ the omission of a party who ought to join as a co-plaintiff, can Only be objected to by plea in abatement or upon the trial in mitigation of damages, is well settled. Whether this principle applies to the common law action of replevin, is left in doubt by the authorities. The action was at first a means of trying the title to chattels, and while a possessory right was sufficient to maintain an action of trespass or case, it was hot sufficient to maintain replevin; (Templeman v. Case, K. B. T. T. T. 1711. 10 Mod. 25. Bacon’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Rogers v. ArnoldNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Hart v. FitzgeraldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Bemus v. BeekmanCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1829
- Prosser v. WoodwardNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Harrison v. M'IntoshNew York Supreme Court · 1806
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Stowell v. . OtisNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Fay v. DugganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Anderson v. StewartCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1908
- Waggoner v. SnodyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
- Miller v. DarlingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.