Case ID: dall_1/html/0440-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Shippen, President,\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Adams versus La Comb.
    REPLEVIN. The material question, on the trial of this cause, was, Whether the goods of a stranger, being removed from the premises before a distress, could be pursued and seized, within the thirty days, which the Act of Assembly allows for pursuing and seizing the goods of the Tenant? See 1 State Laws, 433, &c.
   Shippen, President,

in the charge to the Jury, delivered it as the clear opinion of the Court, that the right of pursuing and seizing goods after their removal, was confined to the goods of the Lessee, from whom the rent was really due; and that the goods of a stranger could only be distrained while they were on the premisses.