Brydges and Others against Walford, Esq
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 23 January 1817 |
| Date | 23 January 1817 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 105 E.R. 1158
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
[42] brydges and others against walford, esq. Thursday, January 23d, 1817. Where the sheriff returned to a fi. fa. issued on a judgment against C., that he had levied, and part of the goods remained in his hands for want of buyers, and afterwards a vend, expon. issued, under which the sheriff sold part of the goods: Held, that in an action against the sheriff for not selling the residue nor paying the money, he might, notwithstanding his return, be admitted to prove that C. became bankrupt before the judgment, and that plaintiff knew his insolvency at the time of action. In case against the Sheriff of Essex, tried before Bnrrough J. at the last assizes for that county, the plaintiffs declared on a judgment recovered in Trinity term 1815, against W. Collin, for 30001.; and that on the 14th of June 1815, they sued out a fi. fa. returnable on the morrow of All Souls, indorsed to levy 14331., &c. under which the defendant seized to the value of the sum indorsed, and returned that he had levied, and that the goods remained in his hands for want of buyers; that on the 6th of November 1815 a venditioni exponas issued, under which the defendant sold part of the goods, and levied 10001.; and although he might have, sold the residue, yet he had not the money or any part thereof at the return of the writ, but in breach of his duty parted with the 10001. and the residue of the goods to persons unknown. The second count alleged, that under the venditioni exponas, the defendant levied the amount of the monies indorsed on the writ. Plea, not guilty. And the judgment and sheriffs return to the fi. fa. as stated in the declaration, having been produced in evidence for the plaintiffs, it was proved on behalf of the sheriff, that Collin became bankrupt before judgment recovered; and on that the 1st of February 1816 a commission of bankruptcy issued against him, and that the plaintiffs had notice of his insolvency at the time they issued execution. It was objected, that this evidence was inadmissible, because the sheriff was bound by his [43] return; and it was inconsistent with that return now to say that the goods were not the goods of Collin. The learned Judge over-ruled the objection, and a verdict passed for the defendant, but he gave the plaintiffs leave to move to enter a verdict, if the Court should be of opinion that the sheriff was concluded by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial