Ah Kle v. Gregory
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Idaho County. The only question in the court below was, Did the circumstances and facts of the case confer on the sheriff the legal right to demand indemnity before he could be called on to execute the unit? This is the contention here. In this state a sheriff must execute all process regular on its face and issued by competent authority. (Idaho Bev.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Idaho County. The only question in the court below was, Did the circumstances and facts of the case confer on the sheriff the legal right to demand indemnity before he could be called on to execute the unit? This is the contention here. In this state a sheriff must execute all process regular on its face and issued by competent authority. (Idaho Bev. Stats., sec. 1882; 1 Deer-tug’s Code, see. 4187.) As to the authority, duty, method of execution and persons to be ejected; 2 Freeman on Executions, secs. 472-475; Fremont v. Grippen, 10 Cal. 211; Sampson v. Ohleyer,…
1Opinion of the CourtHuston, C. J.
Appellants having recovered, on appeal to this court, a judgment for the restitution of certain mining claims and property, a writ was issued out of the district court for Idaho county, and delivered to the sheriff of said county, commanding him to place appellants in possession of the property. To this writ the sheriff made the following return: "I found M. L. Murray, C. L. Rice, T. S. Ratcliff and Pat Sullivan in charge of property, who decline to obey the writ of restitution.” Thereupon, appellants applied to said district court for a writ of mandate to the sheriff of Idaho county,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Powell v. SickingerDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1911