Lantz v. Worthington
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal-from the Common Pleas of Green county. Oct. 29. This was an appeal from the decree of distribution of the proceeds of a sheriff’s sale of personal property, in which.the point raised was whether the earlier execution had lost its priority by reason of the conduct of the plaintiff. On the 5th of June, 1844, judgment was confessed against Worthington and Long, at the suit of Lantz.
Read the full summary
Appeal-from the Common Pleas of Green county. Oct. 29. This was an appeal from the decree of distribution of the proceeds of a sheriff’s sale of personal property, in which.the point raised was whether the earlier execution had lost its priority by reason of the conduct of the plaintiff. On the 5th of June, 1844, judgment was confessed against Worthington and Long, at the suit of Lantz. This was assigned by the plaintiff to A. Lantz, jun., and by him, in Sept. 1845, assigned to Alfred Myers, who, in February, 1846, assigned it to Hughes and Murdock. On the 25th June, a fi.fa. returnable at…
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
In the cases to which we have been referred, the stay was indefinite; and the inference was unavoidable, that the execution was levied either to cover the goods, or to create a lien separate from the possession; neither of which, the law will endure. The legitimate end of an execution is, to have the money at the return of the writ, or, for good reasons set forth in the return, to hold the property for another writ, not to favour the debtor by securely giving him time, or a deceptive appearance of ownership; and with this end, an indefinite postponement of the sale is inconsistent. Here,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Weir v. HaleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
- Sedgwick's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
3Cited by2 opinions
- Nichols v. NicholsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- Reger v. Manhattan Brass Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898