Pierce v. Stevens

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Pierce v. Stevens

30 Me. 184

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1849·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Tenney, J. orally.

— Without any stipulation to the contrary, a mortgagee of either real or personal estate is entitled to immediate possession. But the parties may legally contract that the possession may remain with the mortgager. As to personal property, such an agreement does not contradict the [185]*185mortgage, and may be proved by parol. A plaintiff having no right to the possession, cannot maintain replevin.

Exceptions sustained.

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

Tenney, J. orally.

— Without any stipulation to the contrary, a mortgagee of either real or personal estate is entitled to immediate possession. But the parties may legally contract that the possession may remain with the mortgager. As to personal property, such an agreement does not contradict the [185]*185mortgage, and may be proved by parol. A plaintiff having no right to the possession, cannot maintain replevin.

Exceptions sustained.

Pierce v. Stevens, 30 Me. 184 (Me. 1849).

Pincite

30 Me. 184 (Pierce v. Stevens) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related