Veeder v. Fiske

Decided August 21, 1891

New Mexico Supreme Court · decided 1891-08-21

Appeal, from au order vacating an order for restitution, restoring to plaintiff certain property taken from him by the sheriff summarily, from the Fourth Judicial District Court, San Miguel County. When the writ of replevin was placed in the hands of the sheriff for service, he was bound, under the statute, to execute the same by delivering the goods and chattels mentioned in the declaration and writ of replevin, to the plaintiff. Sec. 1979, Comp. Laws, 1884.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1964

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Order vacating order for restitution, reversed · Decided 1891-08-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION.

Per Curiam.

¶2The judgment below is regular on its face, and it was not opened or set aside. The order for restitution duly followed the judgment, being a necessary incident. If its execution injuriously affected ■a stranger to the record, he had an obvious remedy by ■an independent action, but no right to any summary proceedings affecting the judgment or its result. Therefore, the order vacating the order for restitution was by an inadvertence irregularly made, and must be reversed, and the cause remanded to the district court for further action not inconsistent with this opinion.