Case Name: Aaron Kinsman vs. William F. Warner
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1873-11
Citations: 113 Mass. 347
Docket Number: 
Parties: Aaron Kinsman vs. William F. Warner.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 113
Pages: 347–348

Head Matter:
Aaron Kinsman vs. William F. Warner.
That one appointed to appraise land taken on execution is cousin to the plaintiff’s mother, is not a disqualification.
Writ of ENTRY to obtain possession of land upon which the demandant had levied an execution as land conveyed by one George W. Warner, in fraud of his creditors.
At the trial in the Superior Court, before Lord, J., it appeared by the return on the execution, that the appraisers were chosen by the officer and the plaintiff, Warner refusing to appoint one. And it further appeared that one of the appraisers appointed by the officer was a cousin of the plaintiff’s mother. The tenant thereupon asked the court to rule that the levy was void, upon the ground that one of the appraisers who set off the demanded premises upon said execution was not such a disinterested appraiser as the law requires, being a relative of the plaintiff. But the court declined so to rule, and ruled that the relationship was too remote.
The jury returned a verdict for the demandant, and the tenant alleged exceptions.
C. Sewall, for the tenant.
C. A. Sayward, for the demandant.

Opinion:
Gray, C. J.
We concur in opinion with the judge who presided at the trial, that the relationship between the judgment creditor and one of the appraisers was too remote to disqualify the appraiser. There is no statute in this Commonwealth, defining the degree of consanguinity or affinity which shall operate as a disqualification; and our decisions have gone no further than to hold a son in law or a brother of the creditor to be disqualified. Wolcott v. Ely, 2 Allen, 338. McGough v. Wellington, 6 Allen, 505. In New Hampshire it has been decided that a debtor's brother in law may be an appraiser. Baker v. Davis, 19 N. H. 325. The decisions in Connecticut, that a nephew by marriage, or the husband of the mother of the wife of the creditor, could not be an appraiser, were based upon a statute of that state, which prohibited persons within those degrees of affinity from acting as judges. Fox v. Hills, 1 Conn. 295. Johnson v. Huntington, 13 Conn. 47. And even in that state the disqualification is held not to extend to a cousin. Winchester v. Hinsdale, 12 Conn. 88. Exceptions overruled.