Cassell v. Cooke
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
AFTER the reversal of the judgment in the preceding case, Hopkins moved for an award of restitution to the 7 * plaintiff in error, of fifty-one thousand five hundred and ninety-three dollars, thirty-five cents, the price at which, contended, the land had been sold, under the judgment ' ’ J o now reversed.
Read the full summary
AFTER the reversal of the judgment in the preceding case, Hopkins moved for an award of restitution to the 7 * plaintiff in error, of fifty-one thousand five hundred and ninety-three dollars, thirty-five cents, the price at which, contended, the land had been sold, under the judgment ' ’ J o now reversed. It appeared, that the land had been sold by the Sheriff, * f . . , . , , , -T , , under this judgment, subject to the balance ox the purchase money> claimed by David Cooke, amounting to fifty-one thousand four hundred and ninety-three dollars, thirty-five cents, with interest from the 5th…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
This is a motion by the counsel for the plaintiff in error, to make restitution of the sum of fifty-one thousand five hundred and ninety-three dollars, and thirty-five cents. When land has been sold by the Sheriff, by vir°f an execution on a judgment which is reversed, restitu(*on °* the money received by the plaintiff below, is granted of course. And, if the plaintiff in error had. asked it in this *297case, he should have had it. But, not satisfied with that, he asks a very large sum, which was never received. It appears by the Sheriff’s return to the venditioni exponas, that he…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Alexander v. HoffmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843