Buck v. Colbath
Supreme Court of Minnesota
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF HENNEPIN COUNTY. I. — The complaint alleged no wrongful taking, and should have been dismissed. There is no presumption of wrong from a mere statement of a taking, and the mode of pleading adopted by the Plaintiff in Error would seem purposely evasive. Goit vs. Weepies, 1 Mmn., 134; Reynolds vs. Lounslwy, 6 Bill, 534. II. — The Court erred in refusing to charge that Defendant in Error must show a sale for a valuable consideration.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF HENNEPIN COUNTY. I. — The complaint alleged no wrongful taking, and should have been dismissed. There is no presumption of wrong from a mere statement of a taking, and the mode of pleading adopted by the Plaintiff in Error would seem purposely evasive. Goit vs. Weepies, 1 Mmn., 134; Reynolds vs. Lounslwy, 6 Bill, 534. II. — The Court erred in refusing to charge that Defendant in Error must show a sale for a valuable consideration. It is incumbent on the Plaintiff to show a possession good as agamst the Defendant. 2 Greenleaf on Bw., 571, seo. 613. III. — The…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court
Atwatee, J.
The statement of the case as given in the brief of the Plaintiff in Error, is sufficient for a proper understanding of the points decided, and is as follows, viz:
Colbath, the Defendant in Error, brought trespass de bonis against the Plaintiff in Error, for taking certain goods of the said Colbath in the town of Anoka.
The Plaintiff in Error plead three separate pleas :
1st, A general denial.
2d, A plea that he took under a writ of attachment out of the United States Court, and as United States Marshal; and,
3d, A plea like the second, but in addition setting up the debt and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Freeman v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1861
3Cited by1 opinion
- Marsh v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1873