Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

15 Mass. 133

Goddard v. Austin

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1818-03-15

Case against the defendant, sheriff of the county of Middlesex, for the misfeasance of one of his deputies. The plaintiff sued out a writ of attachment against one Turner, endorsing thereon a direction to the officer to attach certain lumber in the ship-yard of the debtor; and the deputy made and returned the attachment accordingly.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1865

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1818-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1But the Court were clearly of opinion that, under the circum stances of the case, the deputy was under no such * obligation; the special direction given him to attach the lumber excusing him from making any other attachment whatever. If, when he informed the plaintiffs attorney that lie had attached the vessel on his writ, he supposed it was his duty so to have done, because that writ was first in his hands, and after-wards, upon taking advice, he found he was wrong, — he had aright to make his return according to the fact, and to the rights of the parties ; and he cannot be chargeable, as for a false return, merely because he had stated the order of the attachments differently, un der a misapprehension of his duty, (a)

¶2Vide Turner vs. Austin, 16 Mass. Rep. 181.

/15/mass/133 · .json · Public domain