Court Opinion

ID: 7931417
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-08 23:04:47.818744+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:33:21.872195
License: Public Domain

Campbell, J".
dissenting. As I understand the controversy in this case, the dispute was not whether the constable took the property, but whether the taking was not by process designed by the parties as a mere pretext for getting possession, and not for any legitimate purpose. The case is one of abuse of process for illegal purposes, in which it was claimed, and the jury must have found, that Michels was active throughout as connected with the constable. I do not *267understand that a fraudulent use of process to get possession of property, and for no other purpose is, under any circumstances, a justification to any person concerned in the fraud.
I think the court committed no error, and that the judgment should be affirmed.