Court Opinion

ID: 9574827
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:08:45.710009+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:45:31.902294
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Order Reopening Case for Submission of Evidence and Further Argument and Rehearing.
Petition denied.
By the Court,
Horsey, C. J.:
Respondent has filed a 75-page “Petition for Order Reopening Case for Submission of Evidence and Further Argument and Rehearing” in which the court is severely taken to task for (1) determining adverse claims to title (2) in a mandamus proceeding (3) on an incomplete record (4) without opportunity to respondent to produce proofs and (5) in a misconception of such evidence as was adduced. The conclusions reached by us in our former opinion may be condensed to this. Respondent sheriff, armed with a writ against Yrenon, ordering respondent to deliver certain livestock to Mrs. Leonard, found the cattle in the possession of the Bowlers, who were not parties to the writ or to the action, and who claimed title and right of possession. It was the sheriff’s clear mandatory duty, in the absence of any process directed against the Bowlers, in the first place to respect their claim of title and claim of right to. possession, and in the second place to honor their third-party claim *114in default of Mrs. Leonard’s bonding- against it and in the absence of proceedings under the third-party claim statute. Such is still our conclusion. Our issuance of the peremptory writ terminated this proceeding. See 35 Am.Jur. 124, Mandamus, sec. 386. The petition is denied.
Badt and Eather, JJ., concur.