Case ID: tex_36/html/0275-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Walker, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Amos Morrill v. B. S. Fitzgerald.
    1. A motion to correct a sheriff’s return on an execution is determinable by the court, without a jury.
    2. On an execution issued in 1861, the then sheriff received and credited a partial payment of eighty-three dollars, made in Confederate money. In 1867, alias execution issued, and the balance being made in good money, the alias was returned satisfied in full. The plaintiff in execution filed his motion in the court below, alleging that-the Confederate money payment was unauthorized, illegal, and void, and praying that the return of satisfaction in full he set aside, and execution awarded, etc. The defendants in execution demanded a jury trial of the motion, hut this was refused, and the evidence offered hy hoth parties being heard hy the judge, the plaintiff’s motion was sustained. Reid, that there was no error in the action of the court helow.
    Appeal from Travis. Tried below before the Hon. J. J. Thornton.
    The defendant, Morrill, pleaded a general denial of the matters alleged in the motion. Other facts appear in the opinion.
    
      Hancock & West, for the appellant.
    
      N. G. Shelley, for the appellee.
   Walker, J.

It appears that the appellant, J. M. Blackwell, and A. H. Cook, were sued in the District Court by B. S. Fitzgerald, and judgment obtained against them. Execution was placed in the hands of the sheriff, which he had returned satisfied. Morrill had paid the sheriff eighty-three dollars in Confederate States Treasury notes.

A motion was afterwards made, to correct the sheriff’s return. Morrill demanded a jury on this motion, which was refused by the court, and the sheriff was permitted to correct his return, in accordance with the facts.

In allowing the sheriff to correct his return, the court exercised a power which belongs to it, and not to a jury. Mor are we able to discover what question of fact was made on this motion, which it would have been proper to submit to a jury.

We think, in view of the frequent decisions of this court, the rulings of the District Court were correct; and the judgment is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.