Vattier v. Lytle's Executors
Ohio Supreme Court
This cause was adjourned from Hamilton county. It was a scire facias setting forth that the plaintiff, in 1824, recovered a judgment against Lytle (then living), as survivor of St. Clair, for six thousand three hundred and sixty-seven dollars and seventy-four cents, besides costs; that in March, 1825, he issued a fieri et levari facias to the sheriff of Clermont county, which was levied upon one thousand acres, part of a survey of fifteen hundred acres in *the name of De…
Read the full summary
This cause was adjourned from Hamilton county. It was a scire facias setting forth that the plaintiff, in 1824, recovered a judgment against Lytle (then living), as survivor of St. Clair, for six thousand three hundred and sixty-seven dollars and seventy-four cents, besides costs; that in March, 1825, he issued a fieri et levari facias to the sheriff of Clermont county, which was levied upon one thousand acres, part of a survey of fifteen hundred acres in *the name of De Benneville ; that the land was appraised [478 at eight dollars per acre, advertised, and in October, 1825, duly sold to the…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Wright
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is not a ease of void process, nor one where satisfaction has been entered upon a judgment by mistake. The case of Arnold v. Fuller, 1 Ohio, 466, and that of Stoyd v. Cady, 4 Day, 222, were both to vacate a satisfaction growing out of void process. The writ of execution in the case before us was valid, and the-levy, appraisement, sale, examination by the court, order for deed, and the execution of the deed, all in fact took place. The case discloses an alleged after discovery of a failure in the title of the judgment debtor, whereby the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stoyel v. CadySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1810
3Cited by2 opinions
- Carroll v. SaffordSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
- Arnold v. DonaldsonOhio Supreme Court · 1888