Topper v. Taylor
This text of 6 Serg. & Rawle 173 (Topper v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The sheriff’s deed in this case asserts, by way of recital, that he had given due and legal notice of the sale, by advertisement, &c. When the law directs the sheriff to give notice of the sale, it is presumed that he performed his duty. But this presumption may be rebutted by evidence to the contrary. When such evidence is produced, as renders it probable that notice was not given, the burthen of proving the notice, is thrown upon the person who claims under the deed. This has been the construction and general practice under the act of assembly. It is the opinion of the Court, therefore, that the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas should be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
6 Serg. & Rawle 173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/topper-v-taylor-pa-1820.