Howell v. Donaldson
Tennessee Supreme Court
FROM DAVIDSON. The motion originated in the Supreme Court. The motion is predicated upon Code/ s. 3594, etc. See Ealcin v. Boyd, 5. Sneed, 204. The sheriff should have advertised.
Read the full summary
FROM DAVIDSON. The motion originated in the Supreme Court. The motion is predicated upon Code/ s. 3594, etc. See Ealcin v. Boyd, 5. Sneed, 204. The sheriff should have advertised. Whom did he expect to bid if he gave no notice of the sale? See Code, ss. 3038, 3042; also, ss. 2145, 2153; also, Shank-land’s Statutes, pp. 257, 258. See also, 1 Swan, 308; 10 Hum., 244; 2 Hum., 389; 4 King’s Dig., s. 11,213. The Sheriff did not levy on land earlier because engaged in searching for personalty. Time so employed, reasonable. He could not give exclusive attention to these two executions. He has to…
1Opinion of the CourtNicholsON, C. J.
Two motions are made in this court against the sheriff of Davidson county and his sureties, for false and insufficient returns made by two of his deputies, on two executions issuing from this court. The executions issued in the cases of M. B. Howell, C. & M., against Andrew Morrison, principal, and others as his sureties; the two amounting to over $6,000.
The executions issued on the 21st of September, 1871, and on that day were received by the two deputies. They were returnable on the 1st Monday of December, 1871. The returns on the executions are: “ came to hand same day issued, and there…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Farmers Bank v. WyattTennessee Supreme Court · 1931