Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1847-08-12
SUPREME CoURT OF INDIANA.
lfag Term. 1871.
Nay Term, 1877.
REPORTED FOR the SENTINEL a. n cARSAHAN, : Q

REPORTED SENTINEL By A. n cARxAuAS, E-o
JULv 49,
Harrison ei al .. SiigP. Error the Marion c. c.
SMITH, J.
When property levied upon BY virtue Of several execu-
TONS governed BY different laws as the Terms upon which
Is TO be Sold in aeeodance with the force
sell first much Of The property Is necessary satisfy
the execution upon The oldest Judgment that r,
paid according to the law governing The which
the Judgment ws> RENDERED. then sufficient p0tlon satisfy
the execution next IA oder and on, uecessively until all
are satisfied, or the property exhausted.
When The property susceptible Of division the
same order should be observed, FAR pf csbe aud the
sale should be made upon the required by tne cxeeu
lion FIST to be satisfied out Of the proceeds
return of appraisemcnt made BY tro appraisers
iecfed 6y The sheriff, without showing that hd had
appointed and had acted sufficient either the act
oil ls4l which rquned the valuation to be made BY three
appraisers selected by the sheriff. under the act Of IS43
which provided that the execution creditor and debtor should
each select sp RAISER aud 10 either both should
neglect or refuse so 10 d.. the sheriff should appoint
In the latter the sheriff authorized appoint
only on the happening Of contingency, occurrence Of
such contingency should have been shOwn ahssey by
the return.
The aPpraemeut should be made in conformity with the
same valuation and appaisemeDt under which pro-
pery TO be sod aud according the mode prescribed
oy the laws an force at the date of the sale Affirmed
Hner a al o. YOuat ef a. Euof 10 the IIppecanoc c.
e A. aud his wife CONVEX ed certain premises C. aud
with certain conditions annexed decd among which
ave hee That said aud b. should be omitted remain
IA the occupancy Of the house situated upon the premises
aud that the said C. and D. their heirs &c should afford
Wem decent and comfortable support during their
b., then the wife, and the widow Of A., joined the
convey ance as gantOr Of her dover
duioLs Held Per CUriGhl that the widow is entitled not
only to the occupancy of the bue specified but
suitable support and In of failure By and those
claiming under them, 10 peifom nd.tion, may
Ightnliy claim her dover the whole premises The
nainder Of The decree Affirmed.
Isely LOUJOy- Error Decatur C. c. PERKINS, J.
he iue heretofore adopted by the
andeIou wod &c. Is, that all of any given Of words
need not necessarily be Proved but many only Of the
identical wo'ds charged in such necessary
shluie oil themselves the slandeTOus accusation.
The Course OF Practice TO be p1isued when patty dScOv
ers witness to be intoxicated gwen in the Of Mann
ct al Clifton, 81 Blackf, 3o4 held be correct. N
Hmed.
State Hyatt. Error to the Tlppecanoe C. C. Affirmed
STATE WdikiaS ct al Error TO the Floyd {. fr1aed
Bo1cser ct a. BIacksom al EIor Allen {. c.
affirmed.
Connolly .. Wdynieh Error the Putnam C. C. Af-
fTmed.
Pe ions for re-hearing ovenuied in the following
cases; Dumout v. Johnson; Ricketts, Gusn Mckay v.
Mckay: Gableath Doe ex dem Cooke ct all Doremus v
Bond; Lamaslers v. MOieand Mccullough v Sbelm n
Mutphey v. Merry
The court then adjourned.