Ufford v. Dickinson

Decided September 15, 1866

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1866-09-15

Writ of entry. The demandant claimed title under the levy of an execution against Calvin Dickinson upon the- premises ; and, at the trial in the superior court, before Wilkinson, J., the only question was as to the sufficiency of the officer’s return of the appointment of appraisers, which set forth that one of them was appointed by the creditor, and two, who were named, “ were both appointed by me, the within named Calvin Dickinson having been duly notified and neglecting…

Decided 1866-09-15

¶1By the Court. It sufficiently appears by the return of the officer on the execution that one of the appraisers was appointed in behalf of the debtor. This is necessarily implied by the statement that two of the appraisers were appointed by the *544officer, the debtor “ having been duly notified and neglecting to choose an appraiser.” That it is not necessary to specify which of these two was appointed to act for the debtor was settled in Dooley v. Wolcott, 4 Allen, 406.

¶2That reasonable time was given to the debtor to select an appraiser is shown by the return that he was duly notified and neglected to make any selection. Blanchard v. Broolcs, 12 Pick. 47. Exceptions overruled.