Cunningham v. Wilmerding Borough
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 23, April T., 1908, by plaintiffs, from order of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1906, No. 915, making absolute rule to quash writ of replevin in case of R. H. Cunningham et al., trading as R. H. Cunningham & Sons, v. Wilmerding Borough, a Municipal Corporation, and H. F. Davenport, Chief of Police, Defendant, Borough. Rule to quash writ of replevin. The opinion of the Superior Court states the facts.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 23, April T., 1908, by plaintiffs, from order of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1906, No. 915, making absolute rule to quash writ of replevin in case of R. H. Cunningham et al., trading as R. H. Cunningham & Sons, v. Wilmerding Borough, a Municipal Corporation, and H. F. Davenport, Chief of Police, Defendant, Borough. Rule to quash writ of replevin. The opinion of the Superior Court states the facts. Error assigned was order making absolute rule to quash writ.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Rice, P. J.,
This was an action of replevin brought to recover a team of horses, wagon and harness alleged in the statement of claim to have been wrongfully and maliciously taken from the plaintiffs’ possession by Davenport, one of the defendants, acting as police officer and agent for the borough of Wilmerding, the other defendant, and unjustly detained by Davenport until the writ issued, when they were delivered to the plaintiffs by the sheriff. In their original petition to quash the writ defendants alleged “that said team was taken for nonpayment of a license fee for which the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pott v. OldwineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
- Taylor v. EllisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Elkins v. GriesemerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
- McJunkin v. MathersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893