State v. Penner
Supreme Court of Minnesota
In an action brought by the state against the Pine City Lumber Company, a writ of attachment was issued and delivered to one J. C. Becht, who was then sheriff of Bamsey county, who, by virtue thereof, on January 17, 1877, levied, upon and took into his possession a quantity of lumber and other personal property belonging to the company.
Read the full summary
In an action brought by the state against the Pine City Lumber Company, a writ of attachment was issued and delivered to one J. C. Becht, who was then sheriff of Bamsey county, who, by virtue thereof, on January 17, 1877, levied, upon and took into his possession a quantity of lumber and other personal property belonging to the company. On Feb* ruary 26, 1877, an execution against the lumber company on a judgment in favor of one Merriamwas placed in the hands, of Becht as sheriff, who levied such execution on the same-property before attached by him. The state having recovered judgment in its…
1Opinion of the CourtCornell, J.
The return of a sheriff to a writ of attachment against the property of a debtor defendant is his official “answer under oath respecting the duty enjoined upon him by the writ, and is intended to inform the court of what has been done in the premises.” Browning v. Hanford, 7 Hill, 120. Upon being made and filed, it becomes a part of the record in the action, and partakes of its nature, in that it imports absolute verity as to every statement of fact contained in it, concerning which it is his duty therein to speak. Hence, so long as it remains a part of the record, it cannot, as to any such…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Baker v. M'DuffieNew York Supreme Court · 1840
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ryan Drug Co. v. PeacockSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889