Pike v. Huckins
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of replevin, in which the plaintiff was non-suited. The goods had been attached, on mesne process, by the defendant, who was an officer; and the only question now before the Court was, what damages the defendant was entitled to recover.
Read the full summary
This was an action of replevin, in which the plaintiff was non-suited. The goods had been attached, on mesne process, by the defendant, who was an officer; and the only question now before the Court was, what damages the defendant was entitled to recover. For the defendant it was said that he ought to recover six per cent, on the penal sum of the bond; the statute of June 25, 1789, (stat. 1789, c. 26, § 9,) having enacted that “ in case the plaintiff in replevin shall neglect to enter and prosecute the suit, the defend ant may have judgment for a return, &c., and the damages for the taking,…
1Opinion of the Court
But the Court (Sedgwick, Sewall, and Thacher, justices) said that the rule, under the statute, was * uniform [ * 422 ] for estimating the damages; that they were in all cases to be six per cent, on the penal sum on the bond; (1) that if the plaintiff attaching, fails to support his action, the officer is then *316accountable to the defendant in that action whose goods he had attached ; and is to pay over to him the six per cent, damages recovered, and redeliver the goods. In the other case, supposed by the counsel for the defendant, the officer (as the case may be) is accountable to both the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ladd v. NorthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Mattoon v. PearceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ladd v. NorthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Mattoon v. PearceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815