Replevin For A Cow With No Contract In Hennepin

Q: Who won in Sherwood v Walker?

The court reversed the lower court&#039;s judgment in favor of Sherwood and granted a new trial, ruling that if both parties operated under a mutual mistake of a material fact regarding the cow&#039;s condition, the contract was voidable.

Category:

Civil Actions - Replevin

State:

Multi-State

County:

Hennepin

Control #:

US-000265

Format:

Instant download

Description

The Replevin for a cow with no contract in Hennepin is a legal form used to recover possession of property, specifically cattle, that are believed to be wrongfully withheld from the owner. This form enables the owner to initiate a legal action to reclaim their property without necessitating a prior contract. The document outlines essential details including the parties involved, jurisdiction, and the grounds for replevin. Users must fill in specific information regarding the cow in question and any supporting evidence of ownership. Key features include the ability to request immediate possession of the cow and an expedited hearing. This form is particularly useful for attorneys, partners, and legal assistants engaged in property law who require a streamlined approach to reclaiming livestock. It also serves paralegals and legal assistants as a tool to support clients in property disputes, ensuring they understand procedures and filing requirements. The document emphasizes clarity in language, ensuring that even individuals with limited legal experience can comprehend the process involved in filing a replevin action.

Accelerated possession order with elections

View this form

Action for replevin

View this form

Complaint action bank for central

View this form

Avoid repossession for the sales

View this form

Waiver and Release by Parent of Minor Chil...

View this form

Sample Letter for Acceptance of Resignatio...

View this form

Form popularity

FAQ

The Michigan Supreme Court in 1887 declared in Sherwood v. Walker that, because a mutual mistake affecting the substance of the transaction had been made, Hiram Walker had a right to rescind the contract and keep the cow.

The court reversed the lower court's judgment in favor of Sherwood and granted a new trial, ruling that if both parties operated under a mutual mistake of a material fact regarding the cow's condition, the contract was voidable.

When filing a replevin suit, the plaintiff must provide evidence that they are the rightful owner of the property in question and that it was taken without justification or consent.

The Complaint: The complaint in replevin typically must include: (i) a description of the property to be replevied; (ii) its value; (iii) its location if known; and (iv) the material facts upon which the claim is based – in other words, why the filing party is entitled to seize the property that has been taken.

The process of starting a replevin action usually begins with filing a complaint. It also requires filing an affidavit in the county or district court where the property is. The affidavit: States that the plaintiff claims rightful ownership or entitlement to possession of the property.

Replevin actions are a versatile tool for obtaining or regaining personal property which you have the right to possess. In Minnesota, replevin actions are also known by the more modern phrase, “claim and delivery of personal property,” and are governed by a statutory scheme found in Minnesota Statutes chapter 565.