Monroe v. Webb's Executors

Decided October 29, 1813

Supreme Court of Virginia · decided 1813-10-29

<p>_ 1- In al> a» clerkof™court for endorsing credits on an execution, to thepStiff/it is not sufficient to charge, in the declaration, that the endorsements were made by the defendant as clerk, or with his parity or consent, -whereby the plaintiff sustained a loss.- but it should also be stated, that such endorsements were so made, -without the order or consent of the plaintiff.</p> <p>2. (¿aere. Whether an action upon the case lies in favour of the executor of r person injured by the malfeasance in office of the clerk of a court ?(2)</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1813-10-29

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 1906

4 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 president pronounced the court’s opinion, that the judgment was erroneous in this, that no cause of action was charged in the declaration against the defendant; it not being averred that he, as clerk of the said court, made the endorsements on the execution in t’ne proceedings mentioned, without the order or co?isent oh *76the testator of the plaintiffs, nor that the endorsements were made by direction of the defendant.

¶2Original judgment reversed, and entered in favour of the plaintiff in error.

¶3The writ of supersedeas to the judgment on the forthcoming bond was dismissed, as being unnecessary.(1)

¶4 Note. See BeU v. Bugg, post.