Davis v. Napolski

Pennewill, C. J.,

delivering the opinion of the court:

The motion of the defendant is based on the contention that the sale of his lands should have been made by the sheriff then in *238office and not by the sheriff whose term had then expired, even though the writ had been delivered to him and he had seized and advertised the property.

It is conceded that there is but one case in this state that can have any possible bearing on the question raised by the facts stated, viz.: Simonton v. Pattin, et al., 1 Marv. 399, 41 A. 91.

This case is very meagerly reported; apparently no reasons were given by the…