Case ID: ny-st-rep_15/html/0788-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Me Adam, Oh. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Stephen E. Hatfield, Jr., v. Stephen E. Hatfield et al.
    
    
      (City Court of New York, Special Term,
    
    
      Filed May, 1888.)
    
    1. Sheriff—Action against.
    If a sheriff returns an execution satisfied, he may he proceeded against by action or attachment.
    2. Same.
    It is a necessary part of the return that the money (if not paid over to the parties) be brought into court.
    Motion to compel sheriff to pay into court money collected on execution.
    
      James Henderson, for motion; Cochran & Clark, opposed.
   Me Adam, Oh. J.

—If execution be returned satisfied, the plaintiff may proceed against the sheriff by rule of court— i. e., attachment—or by action. Tidd’s Pr. (Am. Notes), 1019; Graham’s Pr. (2d ed.), 366; Crocker on Sheriffs, § 424. It is a necessary part of the return that the sum realized (unless paid to the judgment creditor or his attorney) be brought into court. Adams v. Bowe, 3 Civ. Pro. R., 194, 195; Crocker on Sheriffs, § 424.

Motion for attachment granted, unless within ten days the sum of $383.74, with interest from the time of the return—to wit, April 14, 1888-—is paid into court.