Bryan v. Bridge
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Galveston; Motion by the appellees, who were plaintiffs in the court below, to quash the sheriff’s return of an execution.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Galveston; Motion by the appellees, who were plaintiffs in the court below, to quash the sheriff’s return of an execution. The return was as follows: “Received July 3, 1847,and executed July 14,1847, by levying upon and advertising for sale for cash without appraisement, on the first Monday in August next, between the hours prescribed by law, by advertisements posted in three of the most public places in the county, to wit, at the court-house door, at the Tremont, and at the Verandah, all tlie right, title, and interest of the defendants or either of them in and to a certain negro…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Oh. J.
The first question made is whether a District Court has the power to quash a return of the sheriff.
Of this there can be no doubt in proper cases, and we have so decided in effect in tiie case of Scott & Rose v. Allen, (1 Tex. R., 508.) For instance, where the levy and returns made are not in accordance with law, they may be quashed, or where facts are stated which show there was no levy in fact, the return may be vacated and set aside.
The next question is whether there was error in the judgment of the court quashing the return in this case.
It is very clear there was no error…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Unicut, Inc. v. TEX. COMMERCE BANK-CHEMICALCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1986
- Burch v. MountsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Thorndale Mercantile Co. v. Continental Gin Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1922
- Fant Milling Co. v. MayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1951
- Kendrick v. RiceTexas Supreme Court · 1856
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.