Yost v. Smith, Kline & Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County: Of January Term, 1884, No. 349. This was a feigned issue under the Sheriff’s Interpleader Act, wherein Mahlon Smith, Mahlon H. Kline and Washington I. Sellers, trading as Smith, Kline & Co., were plaintiffs, and M. L. Yost was defendant, to determine the ownership of certain chattels, which had been levied on by the sheriff on three successive writs of fi. fa., as the property of one.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County: Of January Term, 1884, No. 349. This was a feigned issue under the Sheriff’s Interpleader Act, wherein Mahlon Smith, Mahlon H. Kline and Washington I. Sellers, trading as Smith, Kline & Co., were plaintiffs, and M. L. Yost was defendant, to determine the ownership of certain chattels, which had been levied on by the sheriff on three successive writs of fi. fa., as the property of one. John Shoffner, and sold by the sheriff, on the first two writs, to the plaintiffs, and on the third to the defendant. On the trial, before Meyers, P. J.,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gordos
There is not, in this case, the slightest evidence of actual fraud, whether in fact or intention. We discover no impeachment of the regularity and rectitude of the .judgment of Elizabeth and Martha Shoffner, upon which the goods in controversy were sold: the sale upon the fi. fa. was conducted in an orderly and legal manner, in the presence of a large number of people who had opportunity to bid bad they seen fit so to do; the property, if we are to believe the sheriff's appraisement now before us, brought a full and fair price, and that it was struck off to Smith, Kline & Co., resulted from…