Derby Bank v. Landon
Supreme Court of Connecticut
THIS was an action against flic defendant, as sheriff of the county of Litctifield, for the default of David Bird, one of his deputies, in relation to the collection and return of an execution in favour of the plaintiffs, against H'almm lewis. The date of the execution, as alleged in the declaration, was the 5th oí December, 1814, and the delivery to Bird, the 31st of that month. On the trial in the county court, on the general issue, the plaintiffs proved their declaration.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action against flic defendant, as sheriff of the county of Litctifield, for the default of David Bird, one of his deputies, in relation to the collection and return of an execution in favour of the plaintiffs, against H'almm lewis. The date of the execution, as alleged in the declaration, was the 5th oí December, 1814, and the delivery to Bird, the 31st of that month. On the trial in the county court, on the general issue, the plaintiffs proved their declaration. The defendant, in his defence, claimed, that on the 33d of December, 1814, Use plaintiffs, by their attorney, 8. E.…
1Opinion of the Court
SwirT, Cii. J.
It appears from the fads conceded in thi» case, that after the plaintiffs, by an agreement with Lewis, t!>c debtor in the execution, had taken a mortgage to secure the same, and had also agreed to suspend the levy of it, for n¡ne months, they put the same, it being in full life, into the hands of David Bird, a deputy of the defendant, to server according to law; that Bird failed to levy and collect the execution ; and he now relies on this agreement between the plaintiffs and the debtor, for his justification. I am of opinion, that this constitutes no defence. As between the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- State ex rel. Blachley v. YoumansIndiana Supreme Court · 1848