Moffitt v. Jaquins
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The only question in this case, which was a writ of entry, related to the validity of the extent of an execution in favor of the demandant against Jaquins. The objection made was, that by the return of the officer and the certificate of appraisement signed by two of the appraisers, it appeared that the third appraiser, who was chosen, by the debtor and who acted with the other appraisers, did not sign the certificate because he did not agree in the appraisement.
1Opinion of the Court
Parker C. J.
said, in substance, that the Court considered this case settled by the one in 14 Mass. R. 143. The only distinction suggested is, that there it did not appear that the appraiser who omitted to sign did not agree with the other two. But the Court determined, on the ground that it appeared that all were present and acted in the appraisement, that the return was valid. The reason of the case is in favor <7 of this appraisement’s being good. It would be impossible otherwise, from the nature of the appointment of appraisers, to execute the statute. One appraiser is to be selected by…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Short v. PrattMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Barrett v. PorterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- United States v. SladeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1820
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dunn v. FlynnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928