Legal Opinion

Burton v. Wilkinson

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided January 15, 1846PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Trespass quare clausum fregit. It was alleged, in the declaration, that the defendants, on the seventeenth day of October, 1842, broke open the door of the plaintiffs’ warehouse, and took and carried away from thence a quantity of butter, belonging to the plaintiffs.

Read the full summary

Trespass quare clausum fregit. It was alleged, in the declaration, that the defendants, on the seventeenth day of October, 1842, broke open the door of the plaintiffs’ warehouse, and took and carried away from thence a quantity of butter, belonging to the plaintiffs. The defendants pleaded that one Curtis had sued out a writ of attachment against one Royal Cutter, and that the defendant Wilkinson was specially authorized to make service of the writ, and that the butter in question was the property of Cutter, and was stored in the plaintiffs’ warehouse, and that Wilkinson demanded the key of…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Williams, Ch. J.

But two questions have presented themselves to the consideration of the court in this case. 1. As to the power of a person, specially deputized to serve a writ, in relation to the breaking of doors. 2. As to the claim set up by the plaintiffs under the title of Houghton.

A person deputed to serve a writ, as was the defendant Wilkinson, has all the powers, which may be exercised by a sheriff in serving or executing any process, except that he is not to be recognized or obeyed as a sheriff, or known officer, but must show his authority,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Haggerty v. WilberNew York Supreme Court · 1819

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Wilson v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. United States v. Fernando Francis, United States of America v. Clara Francis, and Fernando FrancisCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
  3. Carples v. Cumberland Coal & Iron Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1925
  4. Pulliam v. BurlingameSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  5. Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. YoheIndiana Supreme Court · 1875

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API