Fitch's Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
From the Common Pleas of Dauphin. The sheriff, under a fi. fa., made a sale of personal, property' on the 14th of January, 1848. On the 17th the defendant assigned his interest in the surplus, after satisfying the execution, to Fitch.
Read the full summary
From the Common Pleas of Dauphin. The sheriff, under a fi. fa., made a sale of personal, property' on the 14th of January, 1848. On the 17th the defendant assigned his interest in the surplus, after satisfying the execution, to Fitch. The money Ayas paid into court, and, on the question of the distribution, the sheriff gave evidence, that defendant had agreed Avith him, if he Avould not advertise for a feAv days, and Avould employ men to guard the goods in the mean time, defendant would pay the expense. The sheriff did as requested, and claimed to he reimbursed the amount thus paid.' The…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
It is not pretended the sheriff’s- claim is sanctioned by the fee-bill. Giving to his testimony, heard in the court below, all he can possibly claim for it, we have the ease of a private debt due to him individually, for-services rendered to the defendant in the execution. We are thus presented with a novel attempt by a sheriff to appropriate the remaining avails of an execution in his hands, iñ satisfaction of his private debt, as against the assignee of the execution-debtor. ■ IIow the court below could have hesitated at once to dispose of such a claim, it is someAvhat difficult to imagine.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Miles v. RichwineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828