TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Stanwood v. Woodward

Stanwood versus Woodward

Stanwood v. Woodward, 38 Me. 192 (1854)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 1, 1854
Judges
Appleton, Cutting, Rice, Shepley, Tenney
Citations
38 Me. 192
Cited by 3
Headnotes
An inn-holder has a lien for the entertainment of his guest, upon his property committed to his charge. But before sueh lien can be established, he must prove that he is an inn-holder according to the provisions of R. S., c. 36.
Summary
On Report from Nisi Prius, Shepley, C. J. presiding. Replevin for the tools of a book-binder and a lot of materials used in that trade. No copy of the pleadings was furnished, but they seem to have been the general issue and a brief statement of a lien claim upon the property as inn-holder, for the board of the defendant. The defendant kept the Commercial House at Rockland. The plaintiff went there on May 15, 1852, and stayed until June 11th, following. The property replevied was put into a back room, and remained there till Nov. 30, of the same year. A tender was made to defendant for the sum charged for storage, but he refused to give up the property until the board of plaintiff was paid. That has not been done. The Court were authorized to enter a judgment according to the rights of the parties.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Shepley

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Shepley, C. J.

— The plaintiff appears to have been the owner of the property replevied. The defendant denies his right to have possession of it, asserting a lien upon it as an inn-keeper for board of the plaintiff „at the Commercial House, in Rockland.

No person can be an inn-holder without being licensed according to the provisions of the statute, c. 36, § 11; Lord v. Jones, 24 Maine, 439.

The defendant canno t establish a lien which will enable him to retain the property of the plaintiff, without proof of his character as an inn-holder. There being no such proof a default must be entered. Defendant defaulted.

Tenney, Rice, Appleton and Cutting, J. J., concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 3 cases

View all citing references →
1882–1883: 11900–1901: 11974–1975: 118822026peak 1882 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Hiram Ricker & Sons v. Students International Meditation Society501 F.2d 550 (1st Cir. 1974)
  2. Douthart v. Congdon98 Ill. App. 487 (1901)
  3. In re Watson15 F. 511 (D. Vt. 1882)

Most recent

  1. Hiram Ricker & Sons v. Students International Meditation Society501 F.2d 550 (1st Cir. 1974)
  2. Douthart v. Congdon98 Ill. App. 487 (1901)
  3. In re Watson15 F. 511 (D. Vt. 1882)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list