Chambers v. Carson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
A sale of'the mortgaged premises having been’made under the execution in this case, (see ante, p. 9, and p. 365,) the sheriff of Dauphin county came into court this day, to make acknowledgment of the deed, which was opposed, by Mr. M‘Clure and Mr. Kilter a, on the ground that the acknowledgment could be received in the Middle District alone, where only a motion to set aside the sale which they intended to make, could be entertained.
Read the full summary
A sale of'the mortgaged premises having been’made under the execution in this case, (see ante, p. 9, and p. 365,) the sheriff of Dauphin county came into court this day, to make acknowledgment of the deed, which was opposed, by Mr. M‘Clure and Mr. Kilter a, on the ground that the acknowledgment could be received in the Middle District alone, where only a motion to set aside the sale which they intended to make, could be entertained. They cited the act 'of 16th June, 1836, § 16.
1Opinion of the Court
*438The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
By the 4th section of the act of 1705, the sheriff, on a sale of land, was to give the buyer a deed duly executed and acknowledged in court, for what was sold, as theretofore had been used upon the sheriff’s sale of lands. The construction of this section was, that the acknowledgment ought to be in the court from which the venditioni exponas issued, and to which it was to be returned. The inconvenience was not then great, because the extent of the inhabited part of the state was small, and the sheriff would not have far to travel. M‘Cormick…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- M'Cormick v. MeasonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1814