Stoddard v. Tarbell
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass on the Case against the defendant, as constable of the town of Grafton, for neglecting to make service of process delivered to him for that purpose. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, May Term, 1846, — Williams, Ch. J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Trespass on the Case against the defendant, as constable of the town of Grafton, for neglecting to make service of process delivered to him for that purpose. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, May Term, 1846, — Williams, Ch. J., presiding. On trial the defendant introduced testimony tending to prove, that on the 26th of December, 1842, he prayed out a writ of attachment against one Plains, returnable to the next term of Windham county court, to be holden on the third Tuesday of May, 1843, and delivered the same to the defendant, then constable of Grafton, to whom the writ was…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Hall, J.
It is well settled in England, that a sheriff cannot excuse himself from the service of process, because it is erroneous, or irregular ; but that he is bound to execute it, unless it is absolutely void. The same doctrine is the law of this state. Bank of Whitehall v. Pettes, 13 Vt. 395. It is not, indeed, denied by the counsel for the defendant; but it is insisted, that the writ in this case was absolutely void. It seems difficult to maintain this proposition. The writ was in all respects regular on its face. It was apparently properly signed,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bank of Whitehall v. PettesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1841
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dorothy A. Fleming v. Evelyn McEnanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Hubbard v. GarfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Dix v. BatchelderSupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
- Merrimack County v. Town of JaffreySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1878
- State v. WeedSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1850
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.