Wheeler v. Smith
New York Supreme Court
This cause originated in a justice’s court in Delaware county, where the plaintiff recovered. It was taken by appeal to the county court, but. the county judge being related to one of the parties, it was transferred to this court. The defendant was a constable, and having in his hands an execution against the property of one Murphy, he levied on a horse, and advertised it for sale.
Read the full summary
This cause originated in a justice’s court in Delaware county, where the plaintiff recovered. It was taken by appeal to the county court, but. the county judge being related to one of the parties, it was transferred to this court. The defendant was a constable, and having in his hands an execution against the property of one Murphy, he levied on a horse, and advertised it for sale. Prior to the day of sale an attachment came to his hands against the property of Murphy, by virtue of which he attached the same horse. The property was then sold on the first execution, and sufficient. was raised…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Shankland J.
The facts of this case, as well as the finding of the justice, preclude the plaintiff from contending that the horse sold on the process against Murphy was exempt from sale, by virtue of the exemption laws of this state. There remain two questions in the cause. First, whether the attachment, in favor of Millard and others against Murphy, and which was levied on the horse before his sale, on the Cormack execution, was a lien after such sale, on the moneys received for the horse : and second, whether the surplus moneys, *347raised by the constable, by a sale of Murphy’s…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Marsteller v. FawU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1803
- Williams v. RogersNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- First v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1816
3Cited by3 opinions
- First National Bank v. HanchettIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
- Muscott v. WoolworthNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Lake v. HaseltineNew York Supreme Court · 1887