White v. Lloyd and Another, on Appeal

White v. Lloyd and Another, on Appeal. REPLEVIN. Plea, property in one of the defendants. Verdict as follows: — “We the jury find for the defendants, and that they have a return of their, property in their plea mentioned.” Judgment in favour of the defendants for a return of the property, and for costs. The plaintiff appeals. Held, that, in replevin, if the defendant claim property and obtain a verdict, as in the present case, he is entitled to a return of the goods, but not to damages; that the defendant in replevin was in no case entitled to damages by the common law; and that the statutes of 7 Hen. 8. and 21 Hen. 8. giving the defendant in replevin damages in certain cases, do not apply to a case where the defendant pleads property in the goods. Hopewell v. Price, 2 Harr. & Gill, 275. Held, also, that though a defendant in replevin claiming property, is not entitled to costs by the common law, nor by the English statutes on the subject; yet, by the statute law of this state, he is entitled to costs when he obtains a verdict in such a case in replevin, as in all other cases. Hiday et al. v. Gilmore, in this Court, May term, 1832 . Ante, p. 48. [MAJORITY] The judgment was affirmed with costs.