Jenney v. Rodman
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This action was brought upon a contract made by the defendant with the plaintiff, a deputy sheriff, the object and effect of which was the safe keeping, and return upon demand, of certain chattels attached by the plaintiff, on a writ in favor of James Wing against Stephen Buffinton. The declaration avers a judgment against Buffinton, an execution issued within thirty days, a demand upon the defendant, and a refusal on his part to deliver the chattels which he had received.
Read the full summary
This action was brought upon a contract made by the defendant with the plaintiff, a deputy sheriff, the object and effect of which was the safe keeping, and return upon demand, of certain chattels attached by the plaintiff, on a writ in favor of James Wing against Stephen Buffinton. The declaration avers a judgment against Buffinton, an execution issued within thirty days, a demand upon the defendant, and a refusal on his part to deliver the chattels which he had received. The plea in bar sets forth a judgment, recovered by Buffinton against Wing, for a much larger sum than that which Wing…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The plea is no answer to the declaration. The defendant has no right to set up the execution of Buffinton, to avoid his contract with the officer. The receiptor of goods attached is the servant, for that purpose, of the sheriff’; and he must return the goods on demand, in order that they may be disposed of according to law.
[f the debtor has a right to a set-off, on one execution against the other, and the officer refuses to comply, the debtor will have his remedy against the officer, if any damage happen. -But this is a matter not to be settled between him and the re- [ * 465 ] ceiptor, whose…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Weare v. GoveSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860