Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Abb. Ct. App. 210

Brookfield v. Remsen

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 15, 1867

New York Court of Appeals · decided 1867-12-15

Job Brookfield sued George Remsen, sheriff of Kings county, for not returning, within sixty days after its receipt by him, an execution issued upon a judgment against King Burns, for two hundred and thirty-four dollars and ninety-nine cents, in an action in the supreme court, in which William A. Martin and Henry P. Martin were plaintiffs; by whom this cause of action was assigned to' the plaintiff herein, before the commencement of the action.

Relies on Ledyard v. . Jones

Decided 1867-12-15

¶1By the Court.

Grover, J.

¶2A sheriff neglecting to return an execution within the time required by law, is liable to the owner, prima facie, for the amount. Ledyard v. Jones, 7 N. Y. 550. It may be shown on the part of the sheriff, in mitigation of such liability, that the defendant had not sufficient personal property out of which the whole, or any part of the execution, could be collected. In the present case it was shown that the execution was not returned within the sixty days required by law. Hence it appeared that the sheriff was liable.

¶3Showing that the execution was returned a few days thereafter did not discharge such liability, or in any way affect it. The defendant made no request to the court to submit any question in regard to the defendant’s personal property to the jury, nor was there any direct evidence that the execution could not have been collected out of such property in its life. The judge did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff for its amount.

¶4No ground for objecting to the introduction in evidence of the clerk’s certificate was stated. Thus the exception raises no question for consideration in this court.

¶5The judgment appealed from must be affirmed.

¶6All the judges concurred, except Bocees, J., not voting.

¶7Judgment affirmed, with costs.

/1/abbctapp/210 · .json · Public domain