Hocker v. Stricker

It was ruled, in this case, that before the goods are removed, the sheriff ought to allow a reasonable time, for the defendant in replevin to find security, on a claim of property ; which, in the practice of Pennsylvania, supplies the place of a writ de proprietate probanda: and Shippen, President, said, that if the jury were of opinion, that a reasonable time had been refused, the defendant, Strieker, could not, in an action of trespass, justify under the writ of replevin.^[1]