Lathrop v. Blake
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trover, for certain machinery described in the declaration as follows, viz: a certain paper machine, with the apparatus thereto belonging; one paper-sizer; one paper-dryer; one paper-calender ; one trimming machine, and one rag-cutter.
Read the full summary
Trover, for certain machinery described in the declaration as follows, viz: a certain paper machine, with the apparatus thereto belonging; one paper-sizer; one paper-dryer; one paper-calender ; one trimming machine, and one rag-cutter. It appeared, and was admitted, that "Walter Tufts, on Jan. 9th, 1844, was the owner of a paper-mill, in Alstead, in this State, and that the machinery in controversy was in use in said mill for the purpose of manufacturing paper, and it still remained in said mill until March 31st, 1847. At that time the plaintiff was a deputy sheriff, and as such, and by…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
It has long been the declared doctrine of this court, that a sheriff, who has seized goods upon mense process, or upon execution, has a special property therein; and it is founded upon his responsibility for the safe custody of them. Poole v. Simonds, 1 N. H. Rep., 289; Odiorne v. Colley, 2 *57do., 66. A similar doctrine is holden. in other jurisdictions. 12 Johns. Rep., 408; 6 do., 195 ; 2 Saund. 47.
And it is entirely clear that the action adopted in the present case is a proper form of remedy for redress of the injury complained of, if the attachment be regarded as a valid one, and the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Walker v. ShermanNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Despatch Line of Packets v. Bellamy Man. Co.Superior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
3Cited by2 opinions
- DirecTV, Inc. v. Town of New HamptonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2017
- Smart v. BatchelderSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876