Rockwood v. Allen

7 Mass. 254
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1811
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 7 Mass. 254 (Rockwood v. Allen) 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
Rockwood v. Allen, 7 Mass. 254 (Mass. 1811).

Opinion

The cause was submitted without argument, and the opinion of the Court (absents Parsons, C. J.) was delivered by

Sedgwick, J.

By the statute of 1783, c. 59, § 2, it is enacted that when any goods or estate are attached upon *any writ or process, in case the cause of action [ * 256 ] docs by law survive, the same shall not be released or discharged by reason of the death of either party, but be held good to respond the judgment, to be given in the suit, in the same man[216]*216ner as by law they would have been, if such deceased person had been living; provided that where any estate, so attached, shall, by the executor or administrator of the same, be represented as insolvent, and a commission of insolvency shall thereupon issue: in all such cases, attachments, made as aforesaid, shall have no force or efficacy after the death of the original defendant or defendants in the action.

Rockwood for the plaintiff. The Solicitor-General for the defendant.

In the present case, there was no commission of insolvency issued, nor any representation made by the administrator. The words of the statute are very clear and explicit. The attachment was not discharged, and the officer made himself liable to the plaintiff by neglecting to levy the execution on the goods which he had attached. The plaintiff is therefore entitled to judgment.

As to the question, respecting the measure of damages, it is a general and very sound rule of law, that where an injury has been sustained, for which the law gives a remedy, that remedy shall be commensurate to the injury sustained. The damages in this case are the value of the goods attached, it being understood that such value did not exceed the amount of the plaintiff’s judgment in the suit upon which they were attached.

Judgment on the verdict.

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

Related

Rite-Hite Corporation v. Kelley Company, Inc.
56 F.3d 1538 (Federal Circuit, 1995)
Rite-Hite Corp. v. Kelley Co.
56 F.3d 1538 (Federal Circuit, 1995)
Barango v. E. L. Hedstrom Coal Co.
138 N.E.2d 829 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1957)
Wilson v. Faucy
8 Mass. App. Div. 333 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1943)
Bishop v. McPherson
1 Mass. App. Dec. 98 (U.S. District Court, 1941)
New York Life Insurance v. Boston Consolidated Gas Co.
6 Mass. App. Div. 43 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1940)
G. E. Lothrop Theatres Co. v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co.
195 N.E. 305 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1935)
Pegram v. Stortz
6 S.E. 485 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1888)
Kansas City Hotel Co. v. Sauer
65 Mo. 279 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1877)
Barbour County v. Horn
48 Ala. 566 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1872)
Worcester v. Great Falls Manuf'g Co.
41 Me. 159 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1856)
Zachary v. Swanger
1 Or. 92 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1854)
Hapgood v. Fisher
30 Me. 502 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1849)
Willis v. Dudley
10 Ala. 933 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1847)
Hackett v. Pickering
5 N.H. 19 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1829)
Maxwell v. Pike
2 Me. 8 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1822)
Patterson v. Patten
15 Mass. 473 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1819)
Grosvenor v. Gold
9 Mass. 209 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1812)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 Mass. 254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rockwood-v-allen-mass-1811.