Rix v. Silknitter
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Appanoose Circuit Court. The plaintiff's allege that the defendant, as sheriff of Appanoose county, had in his hands for service ayi execution against Gilliam & Ogle, and that he took possession of and sold certain property in the-petition described, without making any (■levy thereon.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Appanoose Circuit Court. The plaintiff's allege that the defendant, as sheriff of Appanoose county, had in his hands for service ayi execution against Gilliam & Ogle, and that he took possession of and sold certain property in the-petition described, without making any (■levy thereon. The plaintiffs further allege that at the time of such seizure and sale they had a chattel mortgage upon said property, executed by H. S. Gilliam and J3. A. Ogle, comprising the firm of Gilliam & Ogle, to secure an account amounting to $15At, and a note amounting to $226.56, and that by reason of the…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
The execution under which the defendant acted is in due form. The only question involved pertains to the sufficiency of the levy. The evidence is not contained in the abstract and the case must be determined upon the facts as found by the court.
The court submitted a finding of facts and of legal concia*263sions substantially as follows: “That on the -day of - 1879, in company with M. II. Kirkham, of the firm of Drake & Kirkham, execution plaintiffs, the defendant went to the foundry of the execution defendants, which was at the time being invoiced to be turned over to the Centerville Foundry…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Allen v. McCallaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1868
3Cited by10 opinions
- American Fruit Growers, Inc. v. WalmstadIdaho Supreme Court · 1927
- Crisman v. DorseySupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
- Whitaker v. TiedemannSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
- Citizens National Bank v. ConverseSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Monks & Miller, Inc. v. FeinWashington Supreme Court · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.