Duncan v. Webb

Supreme Court of Georgia

Duncan v. Webb

7 Ga. 187

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJuly 15, 1849

DocketNo. 36

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 7 Ga. 187 (Duncan v. Webb) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Duncan v. Webb, 7 Ga. 187 (Ga. 1849).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court. —

Lumpkin, J.

delivering the opinion.

[1.] The execution tendered in evidence by the plaintiff, was rejected by the Circuit Judge, on the ground that the return required by the Act of 1823 should be made either by the Sheriff of the County where the defendant resides, or where the judgment was obtained. The language of the Statute is, that the entry shall be made by “ the proper officer for executing and returning the same.” Prince, 458. It is clear that the Act itself contains no such restriction. The fieri facias is directed “ to all and singular, the Sheriffs of the State.” It would seem, therefore, that it was competent for the Sheriff of any County in Georgia to make the return required by the Act to keep the execution alive.

[189]*189[2.] If the officer makes a false or fraudulent return, he is liable to answer in damages to any person who -may be injured by his misconduct.

Upon this ground the judgment below must be reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Court. —

Lumpkin, J.

delivering the opinion.

[1.] The execution tendered in evidence by the plaintiff, was rejected by the Circuit Judge, on the ground that the return required by the Act of 1823 should be made either by the Sheriff of the County where the defendant resides, or where the judgment was obtained. The language of the Statute is, that the entry shall be made by “ the proper officer for executing and returning the same.” Prince, 458. It is clear that the Act itself contains no such restriction. The fieri facias is directed “ to all and singular, the Sheriffs of the State.” It would seem, therefore, that it was competent for the Sheriff of any County in Georgia to make the return required by the Act to keep the execution alive.

[189]*189[2.] If the officer makes a false or fraudulent return, he is liable to answer in damages to any person who -may be injured by his misconduct.

Upon this ground the judgment below must be reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Ga. 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duncan-v-webb-ga-1849.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack