Pitman v. Couts

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Pitman v. Couts

29 Ky. 90, 6 J.J. Marsh. 90, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 132

DecidedMay 2, 1831

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Ky. 90 (Pitman v. Couts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pitman v. Couts, 29 Ky. 90, 6 J.J. Marsh. 90, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 132 (Ky. Ct. App. 1831).

Pincite

Opinion

Judge Buckneii

delivered the opinion of the court.

Couts moved the circuit court for judgment against Pitman and sureties, for the sum of $25 871 cents, with interest, &c. for his alleged failure as constable, to return an execution within twenty days after the return-day thereof. Judgment was entered against the defendants in the motion, for $23 50 cents, that being, in the language of the judgment, “the estimated value, in specie, of the debt, in the notice mentioned,” with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum, from the 28th of May, 1827, un-u'l paid, and the amount of costs 'in the notice men [91]*91tloned, and also for ten per cent, damages on-the whole amount thereof,&c. To reverse the judgment, Pitman, &c. prosecute this writ of error.

On a motion-against a constable and hia sun-tie», fora ' veral)i(, failure to return an ox(-ciiUon, interest not rocO" -Morehead, for plaintiffs.

The judgment is erroneous-for two reasons:

1st. The notice describes the execution, for the neglect to return which, the plaintiffs in error were thereby informed, a motion would’ be made against them, as one dated on the 21st of May, 1829; that, which the defendant attempted to prove had been delivered to the officer, bore a different date, and was for Commonweallh’s bank notes, instead of dollars, as staled in the notice.

2d. The judgment was erroneous as it relates to interest. See the case of Trover, and others vs. Sharp, decided Spring Term, 1830.

It must be reversed, and-the cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the motion with costs.

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

Judge Buckneii

delivered the opinion of the court.

Couts moved the circuit court for judgment against Pitman and sureties, for the sum of $25 871 cents, with interest, &c. for his alleged failure as constable, to return an execution within twenty days after the return-day thereof. Judgment was entered against the defendants in the motion, for $23 50 cents, that being, in the language of the judgment, “the estimated value, in specie, of the debt, in the notice mentioned,” with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum, from the 28th of May, 1827, un-u'l paid, and the amount of costs 'in the notice men [91]*91tloned, and also for ten per cent, damages on-the whole amount thereof,&c. To reverse the judgment, Pitman, &c. prosecute this writ of error.

On a motion-against a constable and hia sun-tie», fora ' veral)i(, failure to return an ox(-ciiUon, interest not rocO" -Morehead, for plaintiffs.

The judgment is erroneous-for two reasons:

1st. The notice describes the execution, for the neglect to return which, the plaintiffs in error were thereby informed, a motion would’ be made against them, as one dated on the 21st of May, 1829; that, which the defendant attempted to prove had been delivered to the officer, bore a different date, and was for Commonweallh’s bank notes, instead of dollars, as staled in the notice.

2d. The judgment was erroneous as it relates to interest. See the case of Trover, and others vs. Sharp, decided Spring Term, 1830.

It must be reversed, and-the cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the motion with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Ky. 90, 6 J.J. Marsh. 90, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pitman-v-couts-kyctapp-1831.