Tucker v. Lane

23 Me. 537

Opinion

By the Court.

The flour was purchased by the plaintiff in its manufactured state, and he was never the owner of the grain from which it was made, prior to its being changed from grain into flour. The flour in question was not exempted from attachment either by the letter or by the spirit of the Rev. Stat. c. 114, >§> 38.

The plaintiff must become nonsuit.