Goozen v. Phillips

12 N.W. 889, 49 Mich. 7, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 467
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided June 21, 1882·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Cooley, J.

This is replevin for property described as “one pool table, consisting of six pockets, four legs, cues and triangles,” which the defendant as constable levied upon by virtue of an execution against the plaintiff. The only question in the case is whether the plaintiff was entitled to hold the property, exempt from execution, as tools, implements, materials, stock or apparatus, to enable him to carry on his occupation or business.

The occupation or business of the plaintiff at the time the levy was made is shown to have been that of a saloon-keeper. A saloon is supposed to be a place where persons who call for them are supplied with refreshments; and unless a pool table has a place among the tools, implements, stock or apparatus, necessary or convenient to be used in the supply of refreshments to customers, we know of no ground for holding it exempt under the statute. The circuit judge has found the facts, and has not found that the pool table has any necessary or proper connection with the saloon business. It follows that the judgment which was given for the defendant must be affirmed with costs.

Graves, O. J. and Campbell, J. concurred.

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

Goozen v. Phillips, 12 N.W. 889, 49 Mich. 7, 1882 Mich. LEXIS 467 (Mich. 1882).

12 N.W. 889 (Goozen v. Phillips) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Downes v. McClellan
210 P. 397 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1922)
Pueblo v. Colberg
24 P.R. Dec. 673 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1916)
O'Byrne v. Henley
50 So. 83 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1909)
Terry v. McDaniel
103 Tenn. 415 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1899)
Cardillo v. People
26 Colo. 355 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1899)
Boyle v. Walsh
63 N.W. 435 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1895)