Barnard v. Ward
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action against the defendant, as sheriff of the county, for the neglect of David Howe, one of bis deputies, and it was submitted to the opinion of the Court upon certain facts stated by the parties ; it being agreed that if the opinion of the Court should be, that the plaintiffs had a right to recover, the defendant should be defaulted, and judgment be rendered for the plaintiffs for their damages and costs: otherwise the plaintiffs should become nonsuit, and the…
Read the full summary
This was an action against the defendant, as sheriff of the county, for the neglect of David Howe, one of bis deputies, and it was submitted to the opinion of the Court upon certain facts stated by the parties ; it being agreed that if the opinion of the Court should be, that the plaintiffs had a right to recover, the defendant should be defaulted, and judgment be rendered for the plaintiffs for their damages and costs: otherwise the plaintiffs should become nonsuit, and the defendant recover his costs. The facts substantially were, that Howe, by the direction of the plaintiffs, had attached…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
When an execution is in the hands of an officer, and by his delay in the' service of it, any damage or loss accrues to the creditor, he is unquestionably answerable. If, however, he has the money due at the return of the execution, he does all that his duty requires of him ; unless * the same has been previously demanded of him ; in which case he is by statute (1783, c. 44, § 3,) held to pay fivefold interest, for the sum he shall have received on the execution, and which he neglects or refuses to pay over to the creditor on demand. The facts in the case at bar show a neglect of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Inhabitants of Hampshire v. Inhabitants of FranklinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1819