Tinkom v. Purdy
New York Supreme Court
IN error, on certiorari from a justice’s court. 7 J Tinkom was sued in the court below, for a trespass. It 1 e appeared that he was a constable, and had an execution against the defendants, on which he took certain blacksmith’s tools, which were advertised for sale, at auction, at a particular time and place ; on the day of sale, and after two bids were made, one of the bidders, who had bid 12 dollars, refused to bid more, until he saw the tools.
Read the full summary
IN error, on certiorari from a justice’s court. 7 J Tinkom was sued in the court below, for a trespass. It 1 e appeared that he was a constable, and had an execution against the defendants, on which he took certain blacksmith’s tools, which were advertised for sale, at auction, at a particular time and place ; on the day of sale, and after two bids were made, one of the bidders, who had bid 12 dollars, refused to bid more, until he saw the tools. The defendants objected to adjourning the Sale to a different place; but the constable adjourned to the blacksmith’s shop, where the tools were, at…
1Per curiam
The adjournment of the sale to a different place, was a matter of discretion with the constable ; and the question must always be, whether this discretion has been abused. These is no charge of fraud or abuse in the present case ; and the constable could not, therefore, be liable as a trespasser. The judgment below must be reversed.
Judgment reversed.
2Cited by7 opinions
- Richards v. HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
- M'Donald v. NeilsonCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1823
- Noland v. BarrettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Sherry v. Doe e. d. LockwoodIndiana Supreme Court · 1849
- Alexander v. GibsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1819
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.