Schroephel v. Taylor
New York Supreme Court
Error from the Onondaga common pleas. Taylor sued Schroepel in the Onondaga common pleas, in an action of trover, for two horses and other property deposited with the defendant by a constable, who had taken the same by virtue of two attachments against the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Error from the Onondaga common pleas. Taylor sued Schroepel in the Onondaga common pleas, in an action of trover, for two horses and other property deposited with the defendant by a constable, who had taken the same by virtue of two attachments against the plaintiff. It appeared that in November, 1829, Taylor came into the town of Volney, in the county of Oswego, to assist one Chace, who had taken a job of the defendant to clear a quantity of land ; that he brought with him horses and certain furniture for house keeping, and was to receive of Chace $12 per month for his services and the use…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
The question to be decided by this court is whether the attachment was void for either or both the reasons assigned by the court below. I will consider them separately.
1. The justice acted, in issuing the attachment, while he was in point of fact out of the town in which he resided. The acts of the justice in this case were done in 1889, before the revised statutes took effect. Those statutes, therefore, cannot be considered in deciding this question. In the case of Guernsey v. Lovell, 9 Wendell, 319, the jurisdiction of justices of the peace was considered. In…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gurnsey v. LovellNew York Supreme Court · 1832
3Cited by3 opinions
- Faulks v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Ackermann v. BerrimanCity of New York Municipal Court · 1908
- Barnes v. HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1850