Mead v. Kilday
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
CRAWFORD county. ■ Common pleas. This was an action of replevin by Philip Mead against Daniel Kilday for a horse. Daniel Kilday had a judgment on the,docket of a justice against John Mead and William Mead, administrators of John Mead deceased, upon which he obtained an execution and levied on the horse in dispute, which was then in the possession of Philip Mead the plaintiff, and sold it, and purchased it himself, upon the allegation that it belonged to John Mead, the…
Read the full summary
CRAWFORD county. ■ Common pleas. This was an action of replevin by Philip Mead against Daniel Kilday for a horse. Daniel Kilday had a judgment on the,docket of a justice against John Mead and William Mead, administrators of John Mead deceased, upon which he obtained an execution and levied on the horse in dispute, which was then in the possession of Philip Mead the plaintiff, and sold it, and purchased it himself, upon the allegation that it belonged to John Mead, the administrator of John Mead deceased. Philip Mead, the plaintiff, was the son of John Mead, and alleged the property was his by…
1Per curiam
The direction was clearly .wrong. Granting the property to have been in the plaintiff’s father, yet it was levied and sold under a judgment against him as an administrator. Under such a judgment it is clear that nothing but the assets of the dece*111dent can be levied ; and if these cannot be found, the administrator can be pursued personally only in an action for a devastavit. If,-as is suggested, the execution was against the administrator personally, it was void for want of a judgment to support it; and a sale on it could pass no title. Whether, then, the plaintiff had acquired the absolute…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Miller v. Warden, Frew & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
- McCoy v. CadleSupreme Court of Iowa · 1857