Thompson v. Marsh
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of trover for a horse. The plaintiff, being a deputy sheriff of this county, had attached and taken the horse on mesne process in August, 1815, as the property of one Taggart. The defendant Marsh, being also a deputy sheriff for this county, took the same horse in execution, as the property of the said Taggart, in March, 1816, from the bailee or servant of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trover for a horse. The plaintiff, being a deputy sheriff of this county, had attached and taken the horse on mesne process in August, 1815, as the property of one Taggart. The defendant Marsh, being also a deputy sheriff for this county, took the same horse in execution, as the property of the said Taggart, in March, 1816, from the bailee or servant of the plaintiff. The other defendant was interested in the said execution, although not nominally a party to it; and he went with Marsh and showed him the said horse, as the property of the said execution debtor, and…
1Per curiam
The objection taken in this case proceeds upon the ground that all the deputies of the sheriff are but one officer, being all servants of the same master. This arises from a dictum of the late Chief Justice Parsons, in the case of Watson if Al. vs. Todd if Al. The position is true in a limited sense ; so that one deputy cannot interfere with another, and take property already in the hands of that other; but this very principle gives a right of action where there is such an interference. Otherwise there would be great confusion and continual contention between deputies. *234Where property is…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Watson v. ToddMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Vinton v. BradfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Fleming v. ClarkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Beaulieu v. ClarkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Robinson v. EnsignMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1856