Ford v. Bigger
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court; John W. Meek, Judge; 1. The execution, levy and sale was a satisfaction of the judgment. 2 Black on Judgments (2 Ed.), § 1008; 17 Cyc. 1394a!; 2 Ark. 578; 4 Id. 229; 12 Id. 421; 14 Id. 568. 2. The property levied on was sufficient in value to satisfy the execution. 3. The entry of satisfaction was not vacated nor set aside, and the sale is not shown to be void. Nor was any notice given defendant, nor was the property returned.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court; John W. Meek, Judge; 1. The execution, levy and sale was a satisfaction of the judgment. 2 Black on Judgments (2 Ed.), § 1008; 17 Cyc. 1394a!; 2 Ark. 578; 4 Id. 229; 12 Id. 421; 14 Id. 568. 2. The property levied on was sufficient in value to satisfy the execution. 3. The entry of satisfaction was not vacated nor set aside, and the sale is not shown to be void. Nor was any notice given defendant, nor was the property returned. No execution sale can be set aside without notice. 17 Cyc. 13jjb, 1402/; 17 Ark. 390; 8 Id. 490; 10 Id. 129; 20 Id. 637; 48 Id. 478.…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, J.
Appellee, Bigger, recovered judgment for $79.58 debt against appellant’s intestate, Joel T. James, before a justice of the peace of Randolph County, and caused execution to be issued thereon, which was by the constable levied upon a lot of gin machinery. That officer, after due advertisement, exposed the property to sale; and it was struck off to the plaintiff in execution for the amount of the judgment, and the writ wras returned “Satisfied.” Bigger was not present at the sale, but the bid was made by a person instructed by his 'attorney to do so. He subsequently repudiated the purchase made…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Given v. PollockSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923