Corcoran v. White
John W. Corcoran & another, assignees v. F. M. White
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Knowlton, J.
At the trial the plaintiffs rested their claim to the replevied horses solely upon their title and right of possession as assignees in insolvency of George W. Davis. There was evidence tending to show that one Bridges was a part owner of the horses, but the jury were instructed in effect that it was immaterial whether Bridges was or was not a joint owner with the plaintiffs, and that if the plaintiffs showed that they were owners or part owners of the property replevied they could recover.
In the recent case of Fay v. Duggan, 135 Mass. 242 , it was - held, upon a review of the. authorities, that one of two or more joint owners of a chattel cannot maintain replevin for it without joining the other part owners as plaintiffs. That case is decisive of the one at bar. Exceptions sustained.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.