Snow v. Sheldon

• Decision Date: 24 March 1879
• Citation: 126 Mass. 332
• Parties: Luthera J. Snow v. Wallace C. Sheldon
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

126 Mass. 332

Luthera J. Snow v. Wallace C. Sheldon

Supreme Court of Massachusetts

March 24, 1879

Argued September 18, 1878

Hampshire.Replevin of a hay-tedder, sled, wagon and mowing-machine.Writ dated April 9, 1877.The defendant, a deputy sheriff, justified under an attachment on January 23 1877, on a writ in favor of J. A. Palmer, against the husband of the plaintiff.

At the trial in the Superior Court, before Gardner, J., it appeared in evidence that previously to October 2, 1872, the plaintiff with her husband and family lived together on a farm in Ware containing about one hundred and sixty acres; that on that day the farm was conveyed by the husband to Benjamin Hutchinson, who on the same day conveyed it to the plaintiff that the plaintiff, her husband and family continued to live on the farm after the conveyance, the same as before.The plaintiff testified that her husband worked on the farm and attended to the management of it, the same as he did before the conveyances, except that after the conveyances he acted as her agent, and that the farm was carried on as farms usually were in that locality; that a number of cows and other animals were kept on the farm; that it was necessary to employ help to assist the husband to do the planting, haying, and at times to do the harvesting; that butter was made from the milk of the cows, some of which was exchanged for articles used in the family of the plaintiff and her husband; that the crops raised on the farm were usually fed out to the stock on the farm, except such as were used in the family, although at times a portion of the produce was sold and the money given to the plaintiff; that the plaintiff furnished the pay for the help employed on the farm, and for such articles as were purchased to carry on the farm; that some of the articles replevied were purchased by the husband and afterwards paid for by the plaintiff, with money furnished the husband by the plaintiff; and that they were used in carrying on the farm.

It also appeared in evidence, that some of the articles described in the replevin writ were included among other articles in a bill of parcels made by the plaintiff's husband to Henry G. Hutchinson on July 15, 1872, which was recorded on October 8, 1872, and in a bill of parcels from Hutchinson to the plaintiff, dated April 12, 1873, which was recorded on October 6, 1873; that such articles were at the time of such bills of parcels upon the farm conveyed by the plaintiff's husband to Benjamin Hutchinson, and remained there and were used in carrying it on from that time to the time of the attachment.The plaintiff testified that she had been in possession of these articles since the date of the bill of parcels; and that no money was paid by her at any time for the property in the deed or bills of parcels.

It was not contended that the conveyance of the farm or the act with reference to the personal property was made in fraud of the creditor Palmer; and it was admitted that his debt accrued against the plaintiff's husband subsequently to the conveyance.It was also admitted that no certificate was filed by the plaintiff, in accordance with the St. of 1862, c. 198.

The defendant contended and asked the judge to rule that, no certificate having been filed by the plaintiff as required by the statute, the property replevied was liable to be attached on the writ in favor of Palmer for the debt of the plaintiff's husband.The judge refused so to rule; ruled that no certificate was necessary in order to prevent the attachment of the property on the writ of Palmer against the husband of the plaintiff; and directed a verdict for the plaintiff.The defendant alleged exceptions.

Exceptions sustained.

H. H Bond, for the defendant.

C Delano, for the...