Home/Tennessee Supreme Court/Porter v. Fine

Porter v. Fine

1 Thompson 36, 1 Shan. Cas. 21
CourtTennessee Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1848
StatusPublished
Cited by45 cases

This text of 1 Thompson 36 (Porter v. Fine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Porter v. Fine, 1 Thompson 36, 1 Shan. Cas. 21 (Tenn. 1848).

Opinion

McKinney, J. :

In no instance can an amendment be allowed, where in effect it would be not merely to aid an informal description of the premises levied upon, though good in substance, but to give a new or different description thereof, and thereby, upon a pretext of an amendment, substitute a sufficient return for one wholly inoperative and void.

The return, standing alone, is essentially defective. The description of the premises is insufficient — the levy must show the location of the land levied upon with reasonable certainty; — the sheriff cannot resort to a presumption to supply evidence of a fact required to be shown by record evidence.

Judgment of the circuit court reversed, and the motion dismissed.

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

Related

Rodgers v. North Louisiana Amusement & Gaming, L.L.C.
56 So. 3d 289 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)
State v. Lankford
298 S.W.3d 176 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, 2008)
Bodkin v. Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
182 P.3d 1072 (Alaska Supreme Court, 2008)
Irrigation Mart, Inc. v. Gray
965 So. 2d 988 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2007)
McKoin v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co.
830 So. 2d 437 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2002)
In Re Bem Estate
637 N.W.2d 506 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2001)
Sarro v. Maupin
261 N.E.2d 756 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1970)
People v. Drewniak
245 N.E.2d 102 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1969)
People v. Felder
243 N.E.2d 350 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1968)
Coursey v. Greater Niles Township Publishing Corp.
239 N.E.2d 837 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1968)
People v. Burks
224 N.E.2d 668 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1967)
In re the Estate of Thompson
160 Misc. 578 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1936)
Reese v. Chapman
23 Ohio Law. Abs. 641 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1936)
Gahagan v. Whitney
271 Ill. App. 591 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1933)
Hodges v. Meriwether
55 F.2d 29 (Eighth Circuit, 1932)
Davis v. Dalrymple
161 S.E. 738 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1931)
Orth v. Mehlhouse
36 F.2d 367 (D. Minnesota, 1929)
Larson v. State
285 S.W. 317 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1925)
Schubach v. Konshner
114 Misc. 354 (New York Supreme Court, 1921)
Davenport v. Hickson
261 F. 983 (Fourth Circuit, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Thompson 36, 1 Shan. Cas. 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/porter-v-fine-tenn-1848.