Taylor v. Clarke
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on a recognizance entered into, under the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 10, on May 11,1874, by Benjamin Bussell as principal, and the defendant as surety. The case was submitted to the Superior Court, and, after judgment for the plaintiffs, to this court, on appeal, on an agreed statement of facts, in substance as follows: The recognizance was given to relieve Bussell from arrest on an execution against him in favor of the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Contract on a recognizance entered into, under the Gen. Sts. c. 124, § 10, on May 11,1874, by Benjamin Bussell as principal, and the defendant as surety. The case was submitted to the Superior Court, and, after judgment for the plaintiffs, to this court, on appeal, on an agreed statement of facts, in substance as follows: The recognizance was given to relieve Bussell from arrest on an execution against him in favor of the plaintiffs. The condition of the recognizance was that Bussell should deliver himself up for examination to take the benefit of the law for the relief of poor debtors, and…
1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.
In this case the citation was served upon the proper person. The officer who served it was properly qualified to make service upon such person. The plaintiff however says that these facts do not appear of record. The fallacy of his position is in the assumption that it must appear by the officer’s return that service was made upon the proper person, and that no other evidence is competent to prove the fact. This is not so. The officer’s return is evidence, and conclusive evidence of the fact of service and of the mode of service; but he does not know, nor is it his duty to inquire, whether…
2Cited by3 opinions
- United Drug Co. v. CordleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Leavitt v. LeavittMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Lowery v. CaldwellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885