Case ID: me_87/html/0455-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Emery, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Vira E. Ridley, by guardian, vs. Henry Ridley.
    Somerset.
    Opinion April 17, 1895.
    
      Beplevin. Possession.
    
    Principle in preceding case applied.
    This was an action of replevin for hay cut on the premises described in the above action. The case ivas tried before the Court without the intervention of a jury, with a right to except. The facts reported in the exceptions, taken by the plaintiff, will be found in the foregoing case.
    
      JD. D. Stewart, for plaintiff.
    
      A. R. Savage and H. W. Oakes, for defendant.
    Sitting: Peters, C. J., Walton, Emery, Haskell, Wis-well, JJ.
   Emery, J.

In the case of the writ of entry, between the same parties, the court has held that the plaintiff was not entitled to the possession of the farm upon which the hay was cut, and that the defendant was, at the time óf the cutting, rightfully in possession. The title to the hay, therefore, was not in the plaintiff.

Exceptions sustained.