Hubel v. Rorison
Hubel v. Rorison
Opinion of the Court
The defendant was deputy-sheriff of the county of Clare, and had levied upon certain goods under an attachment from justice’s court. Plaintiff, claiming to own the goods, brought suit in replevin in a justice’s court against the defendant. The writ was directed to any coroner of the county, was placed in the hands of a coroner, and duly served. Defendant put in a plea to the jurisdiction, on the ground that the .coroner had no legal authority to serve the writ. The plea was overruled, and judgment rendered for plaintiff.
How. Stat. § 606, provides that every coroner, within his-county, shall serve and execute process of every kind, when the sheriff shall be a party or interested in the case. By How. Stat. § 596, the sheriff and his deputies are authorized to serve any process issued by a justice of the peace, and to exercise all the powers and duties of constables. This statute was enacted in 1867, long subsequent to the enactment of section 606.
Tho coroner has no jurisdiction to serve in any case where the sheriff or his under or deputy sheriff may act. Act No. 30, Laws of 1887, provides that tho sheriff or his under or deputy sheriff may serve all process writs, etc., in any action where an under or deputy sheriff is a party. It therefore follows that, under the law as it now is, the coroner’s right to serve is limited to those cases where the sheriff himself is a party, or is directly interested in the case.
Judgment reversed, and no new trial granted.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Elias E. Hubel v. John Rorison, Deputy-sheriff
- Status
- Published