Majority
p. 65The People vs. Lorenzo Brown, Sheriff, &c.
Headnote
Where the proper proof is filed on issuing an attachment against a sheriff, it is not necessary, on issuing a second attachment, to file any other proof.Motion by defendant to set aside a second attachment for irregularity. —It appears that a former attachment was issued against the defendant
p. 66
as sheriff for not returning an execution. Upon entering the default on the first attachment the proper proof was filed, that the execution was delivered to the sheriff, and had not been returned, &c. A negotiation ensued by which the proceedings on the first attachment was settled conditionally; the conditions not having been complied with on the part of the sheriff, his default was again entered without any proof of the delivery and no return of the execution, <§rc.
The defendant moves on the ground that the second attachment is irregular for the reason that no such proof was filed upon issuing the same.
C. H. Bramhall, Slyjfs Counsel. Thos. J. Dudley, Mtyfor Shff.
J. A. Millard, Relator’s Counsel. J. A. Millard, Mtyfor Relator.
It was held that the proof filed on the issuing of the first attachment inured to the benefit of and was sufficient for the issuing of the second.
Decision.— Motion denied, without costs.