Todd v. . Botchford
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, made April 14, 1881, which reversed an order denying a motion on behalf of the plaintiff to set aside a second execution issued in this action. The General Term order also granted the motion. The action was for a tort. The defendant succeeded and perfected judgment for his costs, upon which execution was issued.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, made April 14, 1881, which reversed an order denying a motion on behalf of the plaintiff to set aside a second execution issued in this action. The General Term order also granted the motion. The action was for a tort. The defendant succeeded and perfected judgment for his costs, upon which execution was issued. This having been returned unsatisfied, an execution against the body of plaintiff was issued. It specified the amount due on the judgment, i. e., its face, but did not “ specify a day from…
1Opinion of the CourtDanforth, J.
The appellant argues that as the first execution commanded the sheriff to collect the judgment, it was his duty to compute interest upon it and enforce payment of the aggregate. If this is so, there was on his part a neglect of duty, to be corrected by motion to vacate his return, and have the entry upon the docket modified; or if necessary, by suit, for compensation. But we think the plaintiff is in error. At common law a judgment bore no interest. By the Eevised Statutes (vol. 2, p. 364, § 9), enacted in 1830, it was made lawful to direct, upon execution issued for the enforcement of a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People ex rel. Ransom v. Onondaga C. P.New York Supreme Court · 1829
3Cited by4 opinions
- German National Bank v. First National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1899
- Moran Towing & Transportation Co. v. FlemingNew York Supreme Court · 1940
- Bank of Sheboygan v. TrillingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- In re DawsonNew York Supreme Court · 1888