Violette v. Tyler

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Violette v. Tyler

28 F. Cas. 1219, 2 D.C. 200, 2 Cranch 200

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedApril 15, 1820

StatusPublished

This text of 28 F. Cas. 1219 (Violette v. Tyler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Violette v. Tyler, 28 F. Cas. 1219, 2 D.C. 200, 2 Cranch 200 (circtddc 1820).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

(Morsell, J., contra,)

was of opinion that the marshal ought to return both writs levied upon the whole property found; and Cranch, C. J., was of opinion that the first writ which came to the hands of the marshal had the preference. Thruston, J., was of opinion that all the attaching creditors should come in pari passu. Morsell, J., was of opinion that the attachment first levied had priority, but that as both were simultaneously levied, the distribution should be pari passu.

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

The Court

(Morsell, J., contra,)

was of opinion that the marshal ought to return both writs levied upon the whole property found; and Cranch, C. J., was of opinion that the first writ which came to the hands of the marshal had the preference. Thruston, J., was of opinion that all the attaching creditors should come in pari passu. Morsell, J., was of opinion that the attachment first levied had priority, but that as both were simultaneously levied, the distribution should be pari passu.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 F. Cas. 1219, 2 D.C. 200, 2 Cranch 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/violette-v-tyler-circtddc-1820.