Hoyt v. Hudson
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on a bill of exceptions, from the court of com,inon pleas of the county of Otsego. This was an action of trespass, brought by Hudson against Hoyt. . The declaration contained several counts, both, in trespass de bonis asporiatis, J x and for an assault and battery of the plaintiff. The defendant i r pleaded not guilty.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on a bill of exceptions, from the court of com,inon pleas of the county of Otsego. This was an action of trespass, brought by Hudson against Hoyt. . The declaration contained several counts, both, in trespass de bonis asporiatis, J x and for an assault and battery of the plaintiff. The defendant i r pleaded not guilty. It was then proved, by the plaintiff below, on the trial, that the defendant below,, who, was a constable, had taken the horse, saddle, and bridle of the plaintiff. The defendant then proved,. that he took the goods by virtue of an execution, dated the 15th July,…
1Per curiam
This case comes before the court on a writ of error to the common pleas of Otsego county, upon a bill of exceptions tendered at the trial. The general principle adopted by the court below was correct. When an officer, under an execution, has once levied upon the property of the defendant, sufficient to satisfy the execution, he cannot make a second levy. This principle appears to be well settled. In the case of Clark v. Withers (2 Ld. Ray. 1072. 1 Salk. 322.) it was ruled, that when a defendant’s goods are seized on a fi. fa. the defendant is discharged. And im the case of Ladd v. Blunt, (4…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Lindley v. KelleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Ex parte LawrenceNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Bank of Orange County v. WakemanNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- Cornelius v. BurfordTexas Supreme Court · 1866
- Moss v. PettingillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1859
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.