Pickering v. Reynolds
This text of 111 Mass. 83 (Pickering v. Reynolds) 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.
Opinion
The officer’s return shows no sufficient legal reason for levying the execution upon an undivided portion of the debt- or’s real estate. It is only in the case of an estate which cannot be divided without damage to the whole, and which is more than sufficient to satisfy the execution, that the levy can be made upon an undivided portion of the whole, to be determined by the appraisers. Gen. Sts. c. 103, § 10. The return wholly fails to show the existence of Such a state of things, and the levy is therefore invalid. “ In the transfer of title to real estate by virtue of a statute power, the requisitions of law must be strictly complied with.” Chenery v, Stevens, 97 Mass. 77, 84.
The question whether the cause should be continued, to enable the officer to amend the return, was within the judicial discretion [84]*84of the judge presiding at the trial, and his decision upon it is not subject to exception. Reynard v. Brecknell, 4 Pick. 302. Monk v. Beal, 2 Allen, 585. Payson v. Macomber, 3 Allen, 69.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
111 Mass. 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pickering-v-reynolds-mass-1872.