Lashaway v. Tucker

In the course of the trial the court held that the word “flour” did not cover meal, and refused to submit a question in that regard to the jury. Proper exceptions were taken to the rulings and to the refusal. I am inclined to the opinion that an error was committed.

I think the amount of the verdict is dubious. I favor a reversal of the *491order and judgment. Judgment and order reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

I think flour includes meal, and, under statute, meal for family use is exempt; hence I concur.

(dissenting.) In view of other provisions of the Revised Statutes, (part 1, c. 17, tit. 2, art. 1.) I think flour and meal are different articles; and the word “flour” in the exemption law was not designed to include meal; so on this I think the circuit was right; but the verdict is larger than the evidence warrants, so I assent to reversal.