Legal Opinion

Pinkstaff v. Cochran

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided March 23, 1895PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Replevin.—In the Circuit Court of Lawrence County; the Hon. Edmund D. Youngblood, Judge, presiding; declaration, etc.; pleas of non eepit, non detinet, justification a!nd title in stranger; issue joined on first two and replication as to the third and fourth pleas, and issue joined on same; trial by the court; finding for defendant; appeal by plaintiff. Submitted at the August term, 1894.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sample

delivebed the opinion- of the Coubt.

This case was tried before the court and the record shows the following state of facts: That appellant, on the 11th day of April, 1892, sold his store building and stock of general merchandise therein to T. J. and Wm. F. Shively, for $4,500, on which was paid $2,500, and the balance secured by chattel mortgage on the stock of goods then in the store, payable as follows: $1,000 in two years and $1,000 in three years from said date. The purchasers entered into immediate possession of said property, and began to make sales at retail, as had theretofore been…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Barnet v. FergusIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
  2. Chipron v. FeikertIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Gaar, Scott & Co. v. HurdIllinois Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Gregg v. SanfordIllinois Supreme Court · 1860
  5. Read v. WilsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1859

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In Re Danville Hotel Co.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 1929
  2. Weiprecht v. RippleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
  3. Weber Implement Co. v. HuthmacherAppellate Court of Illinois · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API