Ide v. Fassett
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action on a receipt given by the defendant to the plaintiff, an attaching officer, for property attached by him on a writ in favor of Noyes v. Bean, in which suit judgment was rendered against the defendant therein at the December term of Caledonia county court, 1870, and execution issued. Plea, the general issue, and trial by the court, June term, 1872, Eoss, J. presiding.
Read the full summary
Action on a receipt given by the defendant to the plaintiff, an attaching officer, for property attached by him on a writ in favor of Noyes v. Bean, in which suit judgment was rendered against the defendant therein at the December term of Caledonia county court, 1870, and execution issued. Plea, the general issue, and trial by the court, June term, 1872, Eoss, J. presiding. Ten swarms of bees were included in said receipt, but nothing was mentioned therein about the hives in which they were. At the time of said attachment, Bean owned a yoke of oxen and a mare, and he told the plaintiff that…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Barrett, J.
It has been for a long time settled in this state that an officer is not liable for property attached by him on mesne process, which has perished without fault for which he is answerable. Bridges v. Perry, 14 Vt. 262; Walker v. Wilmarth, 37 Vt. 289. It is equally well settled that a receiptor of such property is not liable on his receipt, when it has perished without like fault. The defendant, therefore, is not liable for the bees, they having died without such fault.
He is not liable for the other property. The case shows that he did not…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bridges v. PerrySupreme Court of Vermont · 1842
- Walker v. WilmarthSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864