Dewitt v. Oppenheimer & Co.

Citations

• 51 Tex. 103

Syllabus

<p>1. Indemnity bond—Levy.—A sheriff making a levy without a bond of indemnit)', cannot afterwards, in a suit for insufficient levy, plead the want of such bond.</p> <p>2. Bond executed after levy.—An indemnity bond executed subseqoufc to the levy of an attachment, and for the purpose of protecting the officer making the levy, is for a legal purpose and is valid.</p> <p>3. Practice—Beading authorities.—Where it is assigned as error that the court below permitted the counsel for plaintiff to read additional authorities in Ills closing argument, and the record does not show the points upon which the authorities were adduced, the circumstances under which they were read, or whether the counsel for defendant had a right to reply, on appeal, the court will presume that the court below exercised a sound discretion in the matter.</p> <p>4. Suit against sheriff—Practice.—In a suit against a sheriff and liis sureties for damages for an insufficient levy, the plaintiff had the right to dismiss his suit as to the sureties, in which case the official bond of tlie sheriff would not be material to the plaintiff’s case.</p> <p>5. Facts supporting verdict against sheriff.—See facts where a verdict for damages against a sheriff for an insufficient levy of an attachment, was sustained.</p> <p>6. Care required of sheriff in making a levy.—The sheriff in levying an attachment should exercise a cautious and reasonable discretion, such as should influence the conduct of prudent and discreet men in the management of their own affairs.</p> <p>7. Same.—Tested by this rule, if the Iov3r is either insufficient or excessive, the sheriff should be held responsible to the part3>- injured.</p> <p>8. Same—Levy must cover interest and costs.—In making a levy there should be proper allowance for depreciation in value incident to the property seized and to the forced sale; and the amount should cover costs and incidental expenses.</p>