Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

58 Mich. 526

Emerson v. Bacon

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 1885

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 1885-11-19

. (Montgomery, J.) Replevin. Defendants bring error. Creditors have no right to complain of dealings with property which the law does not allow them to apply on their claims : Smith <y. Rumsey 33 Mich. 183; Dart v. Woodhouse 40 Mich. 399 ; Rhead v. Hounson 46 Mich. 247; Anderson, v. Odell 51 Mich. 492.

Relies on Buckley v. Wheeler

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1885-11-19

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 1999

4 state decisions

10188518901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Campbell, J.

¶1Plaintiff replevied a horse, lightning-rod wagon and harness from defendants, worth less than $200, which they held under an attachment levy against one Waldo E. Ilill. Plaintiff held under a bill of sale from Hill, prior to the attachment which he claimed was absolute, but which there was some evidence to show was held as security. The debt due plaintiff, whether paid or secured, was largely in excess of the value of all the property transferred. Plaintiff lent the property to Hill, who was using it in his business of selling and putting up lightning-rods when it was attached.

¶2There are several questions presented by the record, but most of them become immaterial in view of the fact that if this property was Hill’s, it was used in his business and was exempt from execution, so that his creditors could not complain of any disposition he made of it. Buckley v. Wheeler 52 Mich. 1. This being so, plaintiff’s right, whether absolute or as security, was such that the attachment could not prevail against it, and the court below so held.

¶3The other questions need not be considered.

¶4The judgment must be affirmed.

Morse, C. J. and Ohamplin, J. concurred. Sherwood, J. did not sit in this case.
/58/mich/526 · .json · Public domain