Potomac Leasing Co. v. Uriarte
Potomac Leasing Co. v. Uriarte
Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Plaintiff obtained a judgment in this Court in March of 1987. Sometime thereafter, plaintiff requested the Galveston County Sheriff’s Department to execute the judgment on plaintiff’s behalf. The Sheriff’s Department refused. Plaintiff now moves the Court to exercise its broad discretion and specially appoint the Sheriff’s Department to execute on the judgment.
Plaintiff’s motion disturbs the Court for two reasons. First, the order plaintiff seeks tramples upon important
Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that plaintiff's motion to appoint the Galveston County Sheriff’s Department to execute on a judgment issued by this Court is DENIED.
. FED.R.CIV.P. 4(c)(1) gives the Court the power to specially appoint someone to carry out a writ of execution. The rule reads as follows:
Process, other than a subpoena or a summons or complaint, shall be served by a United States marshal or deputy United States marshal, or by a person specially appointed for that purpose.
. 4A C. WRIGHT & A. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE & PROCEDURE: Civil § 1091, 48-49.
The Court recognizes that the sheriff and his deputies are just as capable as a U.S. Marshal in protecting themselves. Nevertheless, comity dictates that absent consent, a sheriff should not risk personal injury merely because a litigant prefers execution by a sheriff, rather than a U.S. marshal.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- POTOMAC LEASING COMPANY v. Melvin B. URIARTE, Individually and d/b/a G & M Bear Equipment Company
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published