Porter v. Haskell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was an action of trespass de bonis asportatis. The defendants in their brief statement, justified the taking under the alleged authority of an execution, issued on a recognizance in favor of William S. Davis, one of the defendants, against Porter, the plaintiff, — said Haskell being a duly qualified constable of Portland, and the other defendant his aid.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass de bonis asportatis. The defendants in their brief statement, justified the taking under the alleged authority of an execution, issued on a recognizance in favor of William S. Davis, one of the defendants, against Porter, the plaintiff, — said Haskell being a duly qualified constable of Portland, and the other defendant his aid. It appeared that the execution when issued by the magistrate, and when the goods of Porter were taken thereon, was not under seal; but that since the commencement of this action, the Justice by whom it had been issued, affixed a seal to…
1Opinion of the Court
Mellen C. J.
Two questions are presented on the report of the Judge, the most important of which arises out of the objection to the admission to the jury of a copy of the execution, by virtue of which the defendant, Haskell, seised the goods of the plaintiff and sold them. By law the original execution should have been, not only under the hand of the magistrate who took the recognizance for the debt, but also under seal. Such however was not the fact. Since the commencement of this action, the Justice, who was also the counsel for the defendant, placed a seal on the execution, while the cause…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Toof v. BentlyNew York Supreme Court · 1830
3Cited by4 opinions
- Kipp v. BurtonMontana Supreme Court · 1903
- Pracht v. PisterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1883
- Southwestern Settlement & Development Co. v. RandolphCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
- W. Dale Wright & Lillian M. Wright & Wright Supply Co. v. ShawSuperior Court of Delaware · 1963