Krepps v. Mitchell
Krepps v. Mitchell
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
We gather from the paper books and the arguments that this is only one of a series of suits involving the claims of the parties, and it may be that on the merits of the controversy the result is right, but the steps by which it was reached cannot be defended.
The ejectment was by Krepps against Mitchell. The appellant Thompson asked leave to intervene and defend, on the ground that Mitchell was in under him, but this being opposed
The execution of the habere facias is set aside and record remitted with directions to award appellant a writ of restitution.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Krepps v. Mitchell. Thompson's Appeal
- Cited By
- 4 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Ejectment — Habere facias — Practice, C. P. On a writ of habere facias, issued onajudgmentin ejectment, the sheriff cannot put out of possession of the premises persons not being nor holding under the defendant, although they came into possession subsequently to the issuing of the writ of ejectment. Ejectment — Sheriff’s return. Where the tenant holds under the defendant the sheriff can put him out, but his return should set forth the fact which is essential to sustain his action.