Commonwealth v. Rees
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Upon tbe return of a writ of error to tbe District Court for tbe City and County of Philadelphia, it appeared that a scire facias issued from that Court at the suit of tbe Commonwealth, to tbe use of Charles Roberts and Samuel Garrigues, against George Rees and others, upon the official recognizance by Rees as sheriff, and the other defendants as his sureties. The breach alleged was that the sheriff' had taken insufficient pledges in replevin.
Read the full summary
Upon tbe return of a writ of error to tbe District Court for tbe City and County of Philadelphia, it appeared that a scire facias issued from that Court at the suit of tbe Commonwealth, to tbe use of Charles Roberts and Samuel Garrigues, against George Rees and others, upon the official recognizance by Rees as sheriff, and the other defendants as his sureties. The breach alleged was that the sheriff' had taken insufficient pledges in replevin. By agreement of the counsel a case was stated for the opinion of the Court below, to be considered in the nature of a special verdict, as follows:— “…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
*Gibson, C. J.
It seems strange, that the assignment of a replevin bond under the 11 Gr. 2, c. 19, should be different in its consequences from the assignment of a bail bond under the 4 Anne, c. 16. There is in these. statutes, not only a similitude of subject, but a remarkable coincidence of provision; yet the English judges, followed by our own, began by holding ■that the sheriff might be pursued after the assignment of a replevin bond, even for ulterior insufficiency of the sureties, while they held him freed from responsibility by the assignment of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Williams v. M'FallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1816
- Pearce v. HumphreysSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1826
- Neville v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
3Cited by1 opinion
- Watterson v. FuellhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895