Brent v. Beck

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Brent v. Beck

4 F. Cas. 61, 5 D.C. 461, 5 Cranch 461

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedMarch 15, 1838

StatusPublished

This text of 4 F. Cas. 61 (Brent v. Beck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brent v. Beck, 4 F. Cas. 61, 5 D.C. 461, 5 Cranch 461 (circtddc 1838).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court,

(Thruston, J.,

absent,) stopped Mr. Brent, who was about to reply, and refused to quash the replevin. Cranch, C. J., observed, that the property did not appear to have been in the custody of the law. Mr. Beck may have done right in taking the goods, but having no warrant therefor, or to arrest Henderson.for theft, his custody was not the custody of the law, so as to make it any contempt of this Court, or of any court, to replevy them.

Buie discharged.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The Court,

(Thruston, J.,

absent,) stopped Mr. Brent, who was about to reply, and refused to quash the replevin. Cranch, C. J., observed, that the property did not appear to have been in the custody of the law. Mr. Beck may have done right in taking the goods, but having no warrant therefor, or to arrest Henderson.for theft, his custody was not the custody of the law, so as to make it any contempt of this Court, or of any court, to replevy them.

Buie discharged.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 F. Cas. 61, 5 D.C. 461, 5 Cranch 461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brent-v-beck-circtddc-1838.