Chapman v. Thornburgh

Citations

• 17 Cal. 87

Syllabus

<p>Where a Sheriff received a writ of assistance, commanding him forthwith to deliver’ possession of certain real estate to plaintiff; and went with plaintiff to the premises for the purpose of putting him in possession, but for some reason not stated— in opposition to plaintiff’s wishes and against his protestations—he declined to take any action in the matter; and then, on a subsequent day, the Sheriff proceeded to execute the writ; but the parties in possession—being the parties against whom the writ run—had, in the meantime, destroyed a number of valuable fixtures, and by their willful and malicious acts had injured the premises in other respects : Held, that the Sheriff is liable for the damage thus done; that he is presumed to have known what his duty was, and to have acted in willful violation of it; and that as his duty was to execute the writ at the earliest practicable moment, and he neglected and refused so to do, it was through his fault that the parties in possession were enabled to commit the injury; and he must respond in damages, however remote.</p>