Willes v. Pitkin
Connecticut Superior Court
Action against the defendant for a false return upon an execution, made by Eleazer Steel, one of Ms deputies. Issue to the jury.
Read the full summary
Action against the defendant for a false return upon an execution, made by Eleazer Steel, one of Ms deputies. Issue to the jury. The facts in the case were — one Josiah Troop was indebted to James Chamberlain and assigned to him a note he had against Amos Fellows and went out of the country — Chamberlain recovers a judgment and execution on said note against Fellows, in Troop’s name, and puts the execution into said Eleazer Steel’s hands, to collect for him — The plaintiff knowing of this, gets an execution renewed, which he had against said Troop, and put it into the same officer’s hands,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The law is so upon the facts aforesaid that the money was not liable to be taken as the property of said Troop. Eor 1st, The money received and indorsed on the execution, by the officer, is his special property, for which he is liable to the person to whom it is due; and 2d, The general property is in the assignee, by force of the assignment, and not in the promisee.
2Cited by2 opinions
- New Haven Steam Saw-Mill Co. v. FowlerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
- Camp v. TompkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1833