Kelleher v. Clark

135 Mass. 45, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 11
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided April 6, 1883·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Field, J.

The fact that the defendant obtained possession of

the goods by virtue of a writ of replevin against Holt, did not affect the right of the plaintiff to maintain an action of replevin against the defendant, without a demand, if the plaintiff was the owner of the goods, and entitled to the immediate possession of them. White v. Dolliver, 113 Mass. 400. Bussing v. Rice, 2 Cush. 48. Blanchard v. Child, 7 Gray, 155. It must be taken [46]*46that the justice before whom this action was tried found as a fact that the plaintiff was, at the time the action was brought, entitled to the immediate possession of the goods without any demand. Exceptions overruled.

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

Kelleher v. Clark, 135 Mass. 45, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 11 (Mass. 1883).

135 Mass. 45 (Kelleher v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Welter v. Jacobson
73 N.W. 65 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1897)
Coen v. Watkins
62 Mo. App. 502 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)