Worthington v. Hollister

1 Root 101
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1785
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 1 Root 101 (Worthington v. Hollister) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Worthington v. Hollister, 1 Root 101 (Colo. Ct. App. 1785).

Opinion

The court agreed and determined — That after the return day of an execution is expired, an officer has no right to levy; but the court observed, that the statute required that executions should he made returnable within sixty days or to the next court, if there are sixty days to the next court — that when an execution is prayed out within, sixty days of the next court, and made returnable according to law, it is returnable to the next court which hath sixty days from the date of the execution and the session, of the court, which will make this execution returnable to the County Court in. June A. D. 1783 •— further, the officer is responsible at all events for the salt.

Arid verdict and judgment was for' the plaintiff.

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

Related

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Smith, No. Cv94-0364352s (Aug. 9, 1996)
1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5284-ZZZZZZ (Connecticut Superior Court, 1996)
Chasnoff v. Porto
99 A.2d 189 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Root 101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/worthington-v-hollister-connsuperct-1785.