Carr

Carr v. Van Canegheim

Good Law
1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 203
California District CourtJuly 15, 1857California344 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hester, J.

Held that the common law gave no fees to the sheriff. 13 Vin. Abr., 144.

The statute of Elizabeth provides, “ that it shall not be lawful for any sheriff to take of any person for serving an execution more than, &c.under this statute it has been uniformly held in England that the sheriff is entitled to his poundage by the service of the execution. 5 Term Rep., 470; Strange, 1262.

The statute of New York gave poundage to the sheriff for serving an execution, to be taken from the sum levied. A former statute of that State was for collecting, &e. The courts there decided that the two statutes meant the same; and that the sheriff was entitled to his poundage by the service of the execution, although the claim was compromised; 13 John, R., 378; 5 John. Rep., 252 ; 9 Wend. 437 ; 17 Wend. 14 ; 1 Gain. R., 192; 2 Con., 421.

*204 But by these statutes there was no provision, allowing compensation for each official act of the officer upon an execution, as by the statute of this State. The 29th section of the act regulating fees, (Statutes 1855, p. 90,) provides that a sheriff shall.be entitled to the following compensation, viz S For levying an execution, $2; for traveling.in making the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.