State ex rel. Franse v. Bryant
State ex rel. Franse v. Bryant
Opinion of the Court
The defendant is the county judge of Cuming county. The First National Bank of West Point recovered a judgment before him on a promissory note against one Ferdinand A. Mervis as principal and Thomas M. Franse and William Boldt as sureties.
On the same day upon which judgment was rendered the sureties paid to the defendant the amount of the judgment and costs and tendered him twenty-five cents to enter satisfaction of the judgment. He refused to enter such satisfaction unless he was also paid one per cent on the judgment as commission. The relator thereupon brought this action to compel satisfaction of said judgment.
Section 9, chap. 28, of the Compiled Statutes provides that “ For any service performed by the probate judge in any matter within the jurisdiction of justices of the peace he shall be allowed the same fees as are allowed by law to justices of the peace for like services, and no more; in all civil actions triable in the probate court, of which a justice of the peace has not jurisdiction, the probate judge shall be entitled to receive the trial fee as is now allowed to justices of the peace for like service in justice’s court.”
The question for determination is, is this one per cent commission to be paid by the debtor or by the creditor?
Sec. 828 of the revised statutes of the United States, under the title “Clerk’s Fees,” provides that “for receiving, keeping, and paying out money in pursuance of any
In Pixley v. Butts, 2 Cow., 421, it was held that to entitle a constable to his fees .upon an execution he must sell the property unless prevented by the plaintiff or by operation of law; and in Hildreth v. Ellice, 1 Caines, 192, where the sheriff had levied upon the property of the defendant sufficient to satisfy the execution, but before the sale the parties settled, it was held the sheriff was entitled to his fees, and in Adams v. Hopkins, 5 John., 252, where the sheriff had arrested a defendant, who was afterwards discharged under the insolvent act, it was held that the sheriff was entitled to his fees, as the defendant was discharged by operation of law; the same point was decided in Boswell v. Dingley, 4 Mass., 413.
After an exhaustive examination of the authorities the the writer has been unable to-find any case exactly in point. The case turns, therefore, upon the proper construction of our statute.
"Where an execution is issued upon a judgment the costs of issuing such execution, together with commission on all money received and disbursed by the sheriff on the sale of property, for each dollar, not exceeding $400, three cents, for every dollar above $400, not exceeding $1,000, two cents; for every dollar above $1,000, one cent. Constables are allowed the same -fees as are paid to sheriffs for like services. These fees are chargeable to and are to be paid by the judgment debtor. The creditor is entitled to the full amount of his judgment. It. would seem that the same rule would apply where the debtor pays the amount of the judgment to the justice of the peace or the county judge before whom the judgment was rendered. The money is collected by the officer in his official capacity for the benefit of the creditor; it is also for the benefit of the judgment debtor, as the costs- of issuing execution, levying upon
Writ denied.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- The State of Nebraska, ex rel. Thomas M. Franse v. Wilbur F. Bryant
- Status
- Published