Smith v. Church
Supreme Court of Vermont
Duty of attaching officer. Trespass on the case for neglect of duty by the defendant in not preserving property attached. — -Plea, the general issue; trial by the court, June Term, 1854, — -Peck, J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Duty of attaching officer. Trespass on the case for neglect of duty by the defendant in not preserving property attached. — -Plea, the general issue; trial by the court, June Term, 1854, — -Peck, J., presiding. In August, 1850, the plaintiff sent to the defendant, who was the sheriff of the county of Addison, a writ in his favor against George Chipman of Ripton, in said county of Addison, accompanied with a letter in which, after describing the writ, he writes, “which you will serve by attaching property sufficient to secure “ the amount of the claim, and return at your earliest convenience.”…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Bennett, J.
We think the defendant has no reason to complain of the charge of the court. Chipman, the debtor, had used up the properly attached, and the rule of law as held by the county court only required ordinary care and diligence in the preservation of the property attached, and made the sheriff only liable, if for the want of such care, the property had been used up by the debtor. The property had been legally attached, though the sheriff had not taken the actual possession of it; that was not necessary in a case like this. TMs mode of service…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Willey v. LarawaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1892
- Dyer v. GravesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Claremont Gas Light Co. v. WoosterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1941