|
|
|
|
Home
| About | How to Search
| Cases | History
| Names | Places
| Glossary | Subject
Index | Sources | Links
| Law School
|
|
James Demoss v. William Montgomery
Record
|
Copy James Demoss vs } Trover William Montgomery Filed 12th Oct 1824 No 1 James Demoss complains of William Montgomery of a plea of Trespass on
the Case &c that for whereas the said plaintiff heretofore to Wit,
on the twenty Sixth day of december in the Year of our lord one thousand
Eight hundred and twenty three was lawfully possessed, as of his own property
of certain goods and chattles to
Wit, four horses, one swingle tree,
three axes, two Barshear ploughs,
one log chain one cart two Yokes of Steers, one Iron pot, two bake ovens,
one common tin, one pot trammel
and one Collar hames & traces
of great Value to wit, of the Value of Four hundred dollars and being
so possessed thereof, he the said plaintiff afterwards to wit on the day
& year first above mentioned at the County aforesaid, Casually lost
the said goods and chattels aforesaid out of his possession; and the same
afterwards, to wit, on the day and year and at the pleace last aforesaid
came to the possession of the said defendant by finding. Yet the said
defendant well knowing the said goods and chattles to be the property
of the said plaintiff and of right to belong and appertain to him, but
contriving and fraudulently intending craftely and subtitely to deceive
and defraud the said plaintiff in this behalf hath not as yet delivered
the said goods & chattels to the said plaintiff or any or either of
them or any part thereof altho. often requested, so to do, and hath hitherto
wholly refused, so to do, and afterwards to wit, on the day and Year and
at the place aforesaid converted and [Image
of page 3] disposed of the said goods and chattels to his own use
To the Damage of the said plaintiff five hundred dollars, and therefore
he brings his Suit &c (Endorsements on the back) This is an action of Trover the Clerk will Issue a Summons
in the Case returnable to May term 1824 Summons case no bail required Eli J Lewis Clk Declaration filed 16 Feby 1824 Eli J Lewis Clk No. 2 Witness Eli J Lewis Clerk of our said Circuit Court at office and under
my hand & Seal official this 16th day of February 1824 and of the
Independence of the United States the 48th (Seal) (Endorsed on the back Viz) (from the Record of the Circuit Court Arkansas County) No 3, No. 4 and the said Montgomery by his attorney Ambrose H Sevier and defends
the wrong & injury when &c for plea Saith he is not guilty in
manner & form as the said Demoss hath thereof above complained, against
him and of this he the said Montgomery [Image
of page 6] No 5 puts himself upon the Country &c Joinder in Issue Filed Septr 7th 1824 Eli J Lewis clk No 5 The United States of America to the Sheriff of Said County. Greeting. WE Command you to Summon Cornelius B. Bennett to be and appear before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Arkansas County on the second day of their next term, to be holden at the Town of Arkansas on the first Monday in the month of September 1824 to testify and the truth to Speak in behalf of James Demoss in a Certain matter of Controversy now pending and undetermined before the said Court, wherein James Demoss is plaintiff and William Montgomery is defendant and this he shall no wise omit under the penalty of what the law directs and have you then there this writ Witness Eli J Lewis Clerk of the said Court Given under my hand &
Seal of Office at Arkansas this 9th day of August in the Year of our lord
one thousand eight hundred and 24 and of the Independence of the United
States the 49th (Seal) (Endorsement on the back) No 6, (from the record of the Circuit Court Arkansas County) And now on this day came the parties by their attornies and a Jury Came to Wit, John Stillwell John Wilkinson, James Boswell John Clark David Dollison, John Morison Wm Currin Harold Stillwell Jacob Barkman, Joseph Jacob Francis Duvall and James Parry and the plaintiff having not sustained his action was on motion of the defendants attorney nonsuited and the Jury discharged, therefore it was Considered by the Court that William Montgomery defendant have and recover of James Demoss plaintiff his costs in and about his defence in this behalf expended &c and that a Sci fa Issue against Security filed for Costs. Bill of exceptions filed and ordered to be made part of the record No 6 No 7 Be it remembered that on this day in the above case after the plaintiff
had closed his Testimony the defendant by his attorney moved for Judgment
as in case of a nonsuit for the following reasons first because there
was no Evidence of an actual conversion of the property and Secondly because
there had been no demand of the property of William Montgomery. It also
appeared that of David Miller a demand was made, who upon his oath said
he was not the agent of William Montgomery: as to the agency of David
Miller the Court refused to decide being a question alone for the Jury,
But further said that as there was no Evidence of an actual Conversion
and no evidence of a demand having been made of Montgomery the defendant
they granted the Judgment of nonsuit to which opinion of the Court the
plaintiff by his attorney begs leave to except and prays that that this
his bill of exceptions may be Signed sealed [Image
of page 9] and delivered and made a part of the record of this Court Territory of Arkansas In Testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and Seal of office at
arkansas this 4th day of October 1824 and of the Independence of the United
States the 49th (Stamped Seal) |
Home
| About | How to Search
| Cases | History | Names
| Places | Glossary
Subject Index | Sources
| Links | Law
School