Isham v. Eggleston
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action on the case to recover damages for the default of the defendant, in his office of constable of Danby, in not executing a writ of execution in favor of the plaintiff against William, Hitt and Jonathan F. Barrett of said Danby. Plea, general issue.
Read the full summary
This was an action on the case to recover damages for the default of the defendant, in his office of constable of Danby, in not executing a writ of execution in favor of the plaintiff against William, Hitt and Jonathan F. Barrett of said Danby. Plea, general issue. At the trial in the county court, the plaintiff proved that on the 15th day of July, 1825, he, by his attorney, delivered to the defendant an execution against the said Hitt and Barrett, for $639, 29 damages, and ‡9 48 cost, directed to the sheriff of Rutland county, his deputy, or either constable of Danby, and dated June 20,…
1Opinion of the CourtPhentiss, J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. — This action was brought to recover damages for the neglect or default of the defendant, in his office of constable of Danly, in not executing and returning a writ of execution, delivered him, in favor of the plaintiff and against William Ilitt and Jonathan F. Barrett of 'Danby. The defendant, the day after he received the execution, delivered it over to a deputy sheriff, who returned it into the clerk’s office in due time, with a return thereon, that he had arrested Barrett and committed him to gaol, and had made dilligent search, but could find neither…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Dix v. BatchelderSupreme Court of Vermont · 1883