Case ID: me_7/html/0236-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "And the Court", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Frost vs. Shapleigh.
    In an action of replevin against a sheriff, for goods attached by him under a writ, which had never been returned, the suit having been settled by the parties, it was held that he might prove the attachment by parol.
    In replevin of certain cattle, the defendant, who was a deputy sheriff, pleaded property in a stranger ; and at the trial, before Par-ris J. he produced certain writs of attachment against the stranger, on which no returns had been made ; and the return-days of which were long past; and proved that after service of the writs, and before the return-day, those suits had been settled by the parties. He then offered parol evidence to show that the cattle in question were attached by him by virtue of those writs, and that therefore he represented bona fide creditors of the debtor, under whom the present plaintiff claimed the cattle by an alleged sale, which the defendant would, impeach as fraudulent. This evidence was objected to, on the ground that the officer’s return was the best evidence of the fact; which it was his duty to have made ; and to the benefit of which all parties in interest were entitled. But the judge overruled the objection ; and reserved the point for the consideration of the court; a verdict being returned for the defendant.
    
      D. Goodenow, for the plaintiff.
    
      J. & E. Shepley, for the defendant.
   And the Court

held that the evidence was properly admitted, the writs having never been returned, to become matter of record ; and that the officer’s omission to make return was excused by the act of the parties in suppressing the suits.