Link v. Harrington
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Shepard Barclay, Judge, The sheriff, under his attachment against Alexe, had no right to enter the plaintiff’s premises and take possession of the plaintiff ’ s goods, or exclude the plaintiff from the possession of the premises in question.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Shepard Barclay, Judge, The sheriff, under his attachment against Alexe, had no right to enter the plaintiff’s premises and take possession of the plaintiff ’ s goods, or exclude the plaintiff from the possession of the premises in question. Smith on Sheriffs, 257; Perry v. Carter, 42 Yt. 50 ; Dams v. Stone, 120 Mass. 228; Williams v. Powell, 101 Mass. 467. The sole purpose of the “act concerning forcible entry and detainer is the protection of the citizen against forcible invasion of private property by an individual acting altogether without…
1Opinion of the CourtRomeauer, J.
This is an action of forcible entry and detainer. The defendant is the sheriff of the city of St. Louis, and is sought to be held liable for entering the plaintiff’s premises against the plaintiff’s consent, in levying a writ of attachment on certain goods therein, belonging to a third party, and assuming exclusive control of the premises for a period of twenty hours or more, without the consent of the occupant, express or implied.
■The action was instituted by the occupant of the premiseá, who upon the trial gave evidence tending to substantiate the facts as above set forth. The sheriff…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Armstrong v. HendrickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- Davis v. StoneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Drehman v. StifelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
3Cited by4 opinions
- Chicago M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. StewartU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota · 1883
- Loan v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Alt v. HobbsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- Kelley v. SchuylerSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1898