Lamb v. Day & Peck
Supreme Court of Vermont
It was agreed by the parties in the above suit, which was brought to the county court by appeal, that the following facts shall be received by the court as the evidence in the .case.
Read the full summary
It was agreed by the parties in the above suit, which was brought to the county court by appeal, that the following facts shall be received by the court as the evidence in the .case. The defendant, Ira Day, procured a writ of attachment in his favor against the said Lamb, and gave said writ to defendant Otis Peck, who was constable for the town of Barre, that said Peck, as constable as aforesaid, attached a certain mare, belonging to said Lamb on said Day’s writ, and said Peck took said mare into his possession, and during the pendency of said Day’s suit against said Lamb, and before final…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Phelps, J.
There is no doubt, that the use of the horse by the defendant.Peck, was a tortious act. The authority of a sheriff, with respect to property attached, extends only to the safe custody of it. He has no interest in it, except to retain it as security for the creditor: and whenever.the use of it would impair its value, to permit such use would be to inflict an injury upon one or the other of the parties, without a corresponding benefit to either. There are indeed cases, where the use of a chattel might compensate for the expense of keeping it;…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Prescott v. WrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
3Cited by7 opinions
- Humphreys Oil Co. v. LilesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
- McDaniels v. ReedSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Paul v. SlasonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850
- Hall v. RaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1868
- Briggs v. GleasonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.