Legal Opinion
Rogers v. Marshal
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided April 18, 1864PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
68 U.S. 644 (1863)
1 Wall. 644
ROGERS
v.
THE MARSHAL.
Supreme Court of United States.
Mr. Carpenter, for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. Lynde, contra.
2Opinion of the Court · DavisJustice Davis
1. It is unquestionably true that a marshal is answerable for the misconduct of his deputy. If Fuller, the deputy, who served the writ of replevin in the case of Rogers v. Remington & Martin, and took the statutory bond, erased the name of the principal, without the direction of some one having authority, he violated a plain duty, and his principal can justly be held liable. The officers of the law, in the execution of process, are obliged to know the…
3Cases cited2 opinions
- Johnston v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1862
- Walters & Farley v. Sykes & HarmanNew York Supreme Court · 1840
4Cited by24 opinions
- Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. HorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Moulor v. American Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Baltimore & Potomac Railroad v. MacKeySupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Bogk v. GassertSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Beaver v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.