Boyd v. Huffaker
Supreme Court of Kansas
M'ror from Harper District Court. In the summer of 1883, Jesse Boyd drove a herd of cattle from Arkansas into Barber county; and in July, C. T. Riggs, sheriff of Barber county, took possession of the cattle under and by virtue of article 9, ch. 105, Comp.
Read the full summary
M'ror from Harper District Court. In the summer of 1883, Jesse Boyd drove a herd of cattle from Arkansas into Barber county; and in July, C. T. Riggs, sheriff of Barber county, took possession of the cattle under and by virtue of article 9, ch. 105, Comp. Laws of 1885. Soon afterward plaintiff brought his action to recover possession of the cattle; and, for the purpose of holding the cattle for examination under the Texas-cattle law, the sheriff executed a redelivery bond, and the defendants in this action, James Huffaker and fourteen others, were the sureties thereon. The replevin action was…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Clogston, C.:
It is claimed that the turning-over of the cattle to the receiver upon the order of the court is a complete answer and defense to the action against the sureties on the redelivery bond. Where property is in the custody of an officer, and for the purpose of holding the prop*527erty a redelivery bond is given, and afterward a receiver is appointed by the court in an action against the owner of the property, and the officer is ordered to turn the property over to the receiver, and it is so turned over, we think is a good defense from that time forward in an action for the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Boyd v. HuffakerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889
- Hansen v. ThomasSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Schlegel v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924