Hart v. Huckins

6 Mass. 399
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMay 15, 1810
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 6 Mass. 399 (Hart v. Huckins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hart v. Huckins, 6 Mass. 399 (Mass. 1810).

Opinion

By the Court.

The authority which constables have to execute writs is derived from the statute of 1795, c. 41. By the third section of this statute, it is enacted that a constable may serve upon any person, in the town to which the constable may belong, any writ, summons, or execution, in any personal action, where the damages sued for or recovered shall not exceed 70 dollars.

This was not a personal, but a real action: the service by the constable was therefore void ; the tenant had no legal notice of the suit, and was guilty of no loches in neglecting to appear and answer to the writ. He ought not to have been called, and the judgment rendered on his supposed default was erroneous, and must be reversed.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

Strohmier v. Stumph
1 Wilson 304 (Indiana Super. Ct., 1873)
Brown v. Webber
60 Mass. 560 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1850)
Flint River Steam Boat Co. v. Roberts, Allen & Co.
2 Fla. 102 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1848)
Town of Essex v. Prentiss
6 Vt. 47 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1834)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 Mass. 399, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hart-v-huckins-mass-1810.