Pope v. Benster
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Merrick county. Tried below before Marshall, J. The facts are stated by the commissioner. Where a judgment has been satisfied, no valid sale can be made under an execution issued thereon. The defendant in error cannot, therefore, recover.
Read the full summary
Error from the district court of Merrick county. Tried below before Marshall, J. The facts are stated by the commissioner. Where a judgment has been satisfied, no valid sale can be made under an execution issued thereon. The defendant in error cannot, therefore, recover. (King v. Goodwin, 16 Mass., 63; Wood v. Colvin, 2 Hill [N. Y.], 566; Sherman v. Boyce, 15 Johns. [N. Y.], 443; Jaokson v. Anderson, 4 Wend. [N. Y.], 474; Lewis v. Palmer, 6 Wend. [N. Y.], 367; McGuinty v. Herrick, 5 Wend. [N. Y.], 240; Swan v. Saddlemire, 8 Wend. [N. Y.], 676; Rorer, Judicial Sales, pp. 344-346; Murfree,…
1Opinion of the Court
Ragan, C.
Joshua G. Benster brought this suit in the district court of Merrick county against James H. Pope, alleging in his petition, in substance, that on January 23,1886,1). Martin & Co. recovered a judgment against one Phoebe Asher and another in. the county court of Merrick county; that Martin & Co. duly sold and assigned said judgment to one John A. Carley; that Carley, in the year 1887, caused a duly certified transcript of said judgment to be filed and docketed in the office of the clerk of the district court of Platte county, Nebraska; that on March 8, 1888, said Asher *306owned the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Walker v. ShrakeNevada Supreme Court · 1959
- Mauldin v. MauldinNevada Supreme Court · 1972