Moreland v. Bowling
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from St. Mary’s county court. On the 31st January 1845, William W. Boioling sued out a writ of fieri facias, upon judgment against George W. More-land and Henry G. Garner, returnable to the 1st Monday in March of that year. This writ was levied the 1st and 3rd February 1845; the property sold on the 7th March 1845, and the writ returned to tire county court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Mary’s county court. On the 31st January 1845, William W. Boioling sued out a writ of fieri facias, upon judgment against George W. More-land and Henry G. Garner, returnable to the 1st Monday in March of that year. This writ was levied the 1st and 3rd February 1845; the property sold on the 7th March 1845, and the writ returned to tire county court. At March term 1845, the appellant moved to set aside the sale: 1. That due and legal notice was not given to the defendant, and the public, of the time and place of sale. 2. That all the property sold, except, &c., was absent at…
1Opinion of the CourtChambers, J.
Where process is duly returned, the party affected by it is bound to take notice of the proceeding; and in proper time, and while the process is before the court, move for any order or judgment in relation to it.
*502Parties have a day in court, for the purpose of being heard; and failing to avail themselves of it, they must thenceforth submit to the injury or inconvenience which their own neglect has occasioned.
The present case, however, is not embraced by these principles, which regulate the general practice, and which we do not mean to disturb. The return of the sheriff was not made to the term…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Dumay v. SanchezCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1889
- Lee v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1932
- Homes v. CorbinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Fick v. TowersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1927
- Johnson v. BemisNebraska Supreme Court · 1878
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.