Woglam v. Cowperthwaite
Supreme Court of the United States
THIS was an action brought against the Sheriff of Philadelphia, for taking goods by virtue of a writ de retorno hatendo.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action brought against the Sheriff of Philadelphia, for taking goods by virtue of a writ de retorno hatendo. The facts were as follow : One Cresson, distrained goods of Hamilton, for rent, due to Samuel Emlen ; Hamilton, replevied the goods, and gave security to the Sheriff, in the usual form ; he afterwards moved with his goods into the house of the plaintiff, who, after rent had accrued to him, distrained the goods ; Hamilton, the next day after this distress, removed the goods from off the premises ; they were followed by the Officer, who made the second distress, and he had…
1Opinion of the Court
The President after recapitulating the above facts, delivered the opinion of the Court.
Shippen, President:
The first point which arises on the case, is, whether there was any subsisting lien in favour of the first disrainor, the goods having been replevied and security given ?
Whatever doubt there might have been before, as to this question, it appears to be now fettled by the case of Bradyl ’ versus the Assignees of Bradbury, in Brown’s Reports in Chancery 427, that no lien remained in the distrainor. By the replevin, the securities in the bond are subtituted in the place of the goods, which…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Keenan & ClarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
- M'Kinney v. ReaderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
- Gray v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
- Gimble v. AckleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1861
- Burkle & Gebbard v. LuceNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.