3 Md. 99
Decided May 15, 1792
General Court of Virginia · decided 1792-05-15
THIS was an action of debt on a bond. The plaintiff had judgment and issued a ca. sa. which was delivered by the sheriff to the plaintiff’s attorney, at his request, during the sitting of the court to which the writ was made returnable, and was mislaid. The plaintiff’s attorney procured a copy or duplicate of the ca. sa¿ from the clerk, upon which the sheriff returned cepi, and brought the defendant into court.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1792-05-15
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1995
5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1The Court
¶2said, let him be committed. There is no necessity for any return to be made on a ca. sa. in order to justify a committitur.
¶3Chase, Ch. J. cited the following authorities: 5 Rep. 90. 2 Salk. 700. 2 Ld. Raym. 775. Cas. temp. Hardw. 348. Crompt. tit. Execution. 5 Com. Dig.
¶4Jenings’s Notes.