Lindsay's Executors v. Armfield
Supreme Court of North Carolina
V I From Guilford. J The plaintiffs declared in two counts against the defendant as sheriff of Guilford; 1st, for a false return on a fi. fa. issued at the instance of tbe plaintiffs against one Brown; 2nd, for negligence in his office by failing to levy the execution within reasonable time; and it appeared on the trial below, that the plaintiffs’ execution tested 3rd Monday in August, 1820, was issued 25th September, and was returned by the sheriff, who is the present…
Read the full summary
V I From Guilford. J The plaintiffs declared in two counts against the defendant as sheriff of Guilford; 1st, for a false return on a fi. fa. issued at the instance of tbe plaintiffs against one Brown; 2nd, for negligence in his office by failing to levy the execution within reasonable time; and it appeared on the trial below, that the plaintiffs’ execution tested 3rd Monday in August, 1820, was issued 25th September, and was returned by the sheriff, who is the present defendant, endorsed “ came to hand fth October, 1820; no property to be found;” and signed by him. It further ap-pearcu, that…
1Opinion
In this case I wish not to express an opinion upon the priority or preferable right to satisfaction of the executions; but if a posterior execution could, by being levied by another officer, as by a constable or a United States marshal, gain a preference over one in the sheriff's hands, I think that the possibility of such preference being gained should quicken the exertions of the sheriff even beyond what the common law required; for by that law there was no such danger, there being but one person in the county (the sheriff) to execute process; and where there are two persons in one county…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kincaid v. . SmythSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1852