Difference between revisions of "Cheshire v. Atkinson"

From Wythepedia: The George Wythe Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m
m
Line 3: Line 3:
 
http://wm-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/01COWM_WM:EVERYTHING:01COWM_WM_ALMA21593279330003196 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: with Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. 2nd ed. Flatbush: I. Riley, 1809.]]
 
http://wm-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/01COWM_WM:EVERYTHING:01COWM_WM_ALMA21593279330003196 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: with Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. 2nd ed. Flatbush: I. Riley, 1809.]]
 
__NOTOC__
 
__NOTOC__
[[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1ChesirevAtkinson.pdf|''Cheshire v. Atkinson'']], Hening & Munford Vol. I 209 (1807),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: with Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,'' 2nd ed. (Flatbush: I. Riley, 1809), 1:209.</ref> the court determined whether a sheriff could be attached for carrying out a decree from a judge, although the sheriff knew the case was pending appeal.  
+
[[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1ChesirevAtkinson.pdf|''Cheshire v. Atkinson'']], 11 Va. (1 Hen. & M.) 209 (1807),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: with Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,'' 2nd ed. (Flatbush: I. Riley, 1809), 1:209.</ref> the court determined whether a sheriff could be attached for carrying out a decree from a judge, although the sheriff knew the case was pending appeal.  
  
 
==Background==
 
==Background==

Revision as of 10:36, 12 March 2018

File:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1ChesirevAtkinson.jpg
First page of the opinion Cheshire v. Wyld, in [Hening & Munford http://wm-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/01COWM_WM:EVERYTHING:01COWM_WM_ALMA21593279330003196 Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: with Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District], by William Hening and William Munford. 2nd ed. Flatbush: I. Riley, 1809.

Cheshire v. Atkinson, 11 Va. (1 Hen. & M.) 209 (1807),[1] the court determined whether a sheriff could be attached for carrying out a decree from a judge, although the sheriff knew the case was pending appeal.

Background

A very brief case where the court determined that the plaintiff could not bring an attachment against a sheriff for carrying out a decree from a judge, just because he had notice of an appeal.

The Court's Decision

The Court found the attachment proceeding would not apply against the sheriff.

See also

References

  1. William Hening and William Munford, Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: with Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District, 2nd ed. (Flatbush: I. Riley, 1809), 1:209.