Hetrick v. Campbell & Crum
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Armstrong county. This was an action by Hetrick vs. Campbell and Crum. The action was in trespass, brought to recover the value of a yoke of oxen, which, in the summer of 1848, were the properly of the plaintiff. It seems that a judgment was obtained against him on the 30th August, 1840, which remained unsatisfied, and, on the 22d July, 1848, was assigned to Hugh Campbell, one of the defendants.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Armstrong county. This was an action by Hetrick vs. Campbell and Crum. The action was in trespass, brought to recover the value of a yoke of oxen, which, in the summer of 1848, were the properly of the plaintiff. It seems that a judgment was obtained against him on the 30th August, 1840, which remained unsatisfied, and, on the 22d July, 1848, was assigned to Hugh Campbell, one of the defendants. Two days after that, on the 24th July, he issued an execution upon it, and placed it in the hands of the other defendant, D. Crum, who, by virtue of it, levied on the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, by
Coulter, J.
— Hetrick, who was a farmer in a small w'ay, but did a little at every thing, as appears by the evidence, had two *265yoke of young oxen in Ms possession, at the time the alleged grievance was committed by the defendants, one of whom is a judgment creditor, and the other a constable. In July, 1848, Campbell issued an execution on his judgment against Hetrick, wMch Crum, the constable, levied on one of the yoke of oxen, which were acknowledged, on all hands, to be the property of Hetrick, and sold them. And for that this action of trespass is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lindsey v. FullerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
3Cited by2 opinions
- Janney v. HowardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Croft v. JenningsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896