French v. Eaton
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Petition tor Partition. The petitioner claimed three undivided fortieth parts of the northerly half of lot number 29, in Candia. The defendant pleaded that he was sole seized of the premises. The other defendants were defaulted.
Read the full summary
Petition tor Partition. The petitioner claimed three undivided fortieth parts of the northerly half of lot number 29, in Candia. The defendant pleaded that he was sole seized of the premises. The other defendants were defaulted. The title of the petitioner was by virtue of the extent of an execution issued upon a judgment recovered at the September term, 1840, of the court of common pleas for this county, in favor of the petitioner against Luke Eaton, a brother of the defendant, and one of the sons and heirs at law of Paul Eaton, deceased. The petitioner offered evidence tending to show that…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
The counsel for the plaintiff has made an ingenious and sensible argument, for the purpose of proving that an extent ought not to be held good, although it is made to satisfy illegal fees taxed upon the execution, and yet considered void *342because tbe land is sét off for tbe purpose of paying interest upon tbe judgment. It is said that in either case tbe land is taken to satisfy a claim exceeding tbe amount of tbe judgment and thg fees upon tbe levy of tbe execution. Tbe reason why an extent is not held to be void, where tbe sheriff taxes illegal fees, is given in Burnham vs. Aiken, 6 N. H.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wellington v. GaleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Moody v. LeavittSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1820
- Odiorne v. MasonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1837
- Burnham v. AikenSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
3Cited by1 opinion
- Jarvis v. BrooksSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1853