Tukey v. Smith
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Exceptions from tho Western District Court, Whitman J. presiding. Tho action was brought against the defendant, who had been sheriff of the county of Cumberland, for the default of Sawyer, one of his deputies, in not keeping and delivering a quantity of boards and board logs, attached by Savnjcr on a writ in favor of the plaintiffs against ‘Seal and Bailey.
Read the full summary
Exceptions from tho Western District Court, Whitman J. presiding. Tho action was brought against the defendant, who had been sheriff of the county of Cumberland, for the default of Sawyer, one of his deputies, in not keeping and delivering a quantity of boards and board logs, attached by Savnjcr on a writ in favor of the plaintiffs against ‘Seal and Bailey. Tho plaintiffs produced Sawyer’s return on the writ of his attachment of tho property, and proved a demand upon Sawyer for it, within thirty days after final judgment in the suit, and a neglect to deliver it to bo taken on the execution.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Emery J.
If the Judge in the District Court rejected testimony, which, if admitted, would have constituted a defence against the action, the exceptions must be sustained. It is probable the idea of taking the ground, on which the defendant relies/ arose from some remarks of the Court in the case Blake v. Shaw, 7 Mass. R. 505. But in the present case, we must apprehend, that after the attachment was made, and while the defendant was in office, there was negligence, to the injury of the plaintiff.
The law invests the sheriff with power to attach, and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bond v. PadelfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Blake v. ShawMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1811
3Cited by2 opinions
- Seybold v. RehwaldIndiana Supreme Court · 1911
- Short v. LandesSuperior Court of Delaware · 1944