¶1The wife of Millard was a good witness.' Millard himself was a competent witness. The real question in issue was, whether the officer had a right to attach and hold the property for creditors, at the time of the attachment *467and it was no answer, that the attachments had been dissolved, at the time of the trial. At present, there is nothing on the record, entitling the defendant to a return. If a suggestion is made for that purpose, it must be considered on its merits. The exceptions are overruled; and, it appearing to the court that they are frivolous, the defendant is entitled to iudgment for double costs.
56 Mass. 465
Williams v. Greene
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided October 15, 1848
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1848-10-15
This was an action of replevin for certain engines and lathes named in the writ, which was dated September 2d, 1846, and was tried before Ward, J., in the court of common pleas. The plaintiff claimed the articles replevied under a bill of sale thereof to him from Pierce Millard, dated August 15th, 1846, and a delivery on the same day, subject to a mortgage to the Fall River Iron Works Company.
Decided 1848-10-15