Marshall v. Hosmer

3 Mass. 23
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided July 15, 1807·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Curia.

This is a plea to the jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas, holden for the county of Suffolk. The sheriff is sued for the malfeasance of his deputy in the service of an original writ, which issued from the clerk’s office of the Court of Common Pleas in Suffolk, and which was returnable to that Court. It is difficult to suggest any foundation on which to rest this plea. It is true that some actions against the sheriff are local, and not transitory , but when the action arises partly from matter of record, and partly from matter in pais in different counties, the plaintiff may [ * 24 ] bring * his action in which of the counties he pleases.

The plea is, without question, bad, and the defendant must answer further, '&c.

Vide 1 Wils. 336, Griffith vs. Walker,—Cowper, 177.—Roll 37.—See also 2 Mass. Rep. 569, Foster vs. Baldwin

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

Marshall v. Hosmer, 3 Mass. 23 (Mass. 1807).

3 Mass. 23 (Marshall v. Hosmer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lakeside Irrigation Co. v. Markham Irrigation Co.
285 S.W. 593 (Texas Supreme Court, 1926)
Magee v. Flynn
139 N.E. 842 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1923)
White v. Rio Grande Western Railway Co.
71 P. 593 (Utah Supreme Court, 1903)
Deseret Irrigation Co. v. McIntyre
52 P. 628 (Utah Supreme Court, 1898)
Foster v. Baldwin
2 Mass. 569 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1786)