Gartside v. Nixon
Joseph Gartside v. Richard G. Nixon
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.
Baker, Judge,
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a proceeding under the statute for the claim and delivery of personal property, instituted by the respondent, to recover a horse then in the possession of the appellant. The plaintiff’s title to the property is put in issue by the pleadings. At the instance of the plaintiff, the court instructed the jury that “the plaintiff claims and alleges that he and the persons under whom he claims title to the horse have had actual possession of him ever since some time in September, 1865 ; and if the jury believe the fact to be so, then the plaintiff is entitled to recover the horse, unless the jury believe from the evidence that the horse really and in fact belonged to the defendant.” This instruction is erroneous. Where the plaintiff’s title is denied, nakéd possession is not sufficient to maintain an action. It must appear that he had a right to the possession of the property. The plaintiff must prove that he had a general or special property in the horse. ( 10 Mo. 277 ; 38 Mo. 160 ; 9 Mo. 256 ; 1 Johns. 380 .)
The judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed and the cause, remanded.
The other judges concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 10 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.