Runlet v. Warren
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a writ of scire facias against the defendant, as bail for one John H. Dearborn. The plaintiff alleges, in his writ, that he recovered judgment against Dearborn, at the October term of this Court, in the year 1809, for 111 dollars 83 cents damage, and 105 dollars 18 cents costs; that execution issued thereon on the 21st day of the same October, which was made returnable in six months from its date, and was duly delivered to J. F., a deputy sheriff, to be executed;…
Read the full summary
This was a writ of scire facias against the defendant, as bail for one John H. Dearborn. The plaintiff alleges, in his writ, that he recovered judgment against Dearborn, at the October term of this Court, in the year 1809, for 111 dollars 83 cents damage, and 105 dollars 18 cents costs; that execution issued thereon on the 21st day of the same October, which was made returnable in six months from its date, and was duly delivered to J. F., a deputy sheriff, to be executed; that Dearborn hath not abode the said judgment, but has avoided the same, so that he could not be found; that the deputy…
1Opinion of the Court
The action stood continued nisi for advisement, and at an adjournment of the March term in Suffolk, judgment was given for the plaintiff, the Court observing that the irregularity in issuing the execution did not make the same void; although it would have been superseded upon motion. The return of the officer was prima facie evidence of the inability of the principal to satisfy the judgment, and of his avoidance ; and there is nothing in the case to rebut this presumption. The defendant’s plea in bar is bad and insufficient.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Chesebro v. BarmeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- Howe v. RansomSupreme Court of Vermont · 1828
- Brazill v. GreenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Niles v. FieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1841