Skip to main content
· 4/22/1895

Dowdall v. Wisher

Citations

  • 167 Pa. 475
  • 31 A. 749
  • 1895 Pa. LEXIS 932

Syllabus

<p>Attachment execution — Contract—Evidence.</p> <p>W., being financially embarrassed, confessed judgments to O., D. and others. Executions were issued on all these judgments on the same day, but O.’s was first placed in the hands of the sheriff. At the sheriff’s sale, O. bid in W.’s horses, wagons and harness which had been used in the drayage business. After the-sale, O. employed W. at a certain salary per week to cany on the drayage business. Subsequently O. sold the business and obtained more for it than the amount of his judgment against W. Two years after the sheriff’s sale, D. issued an attachment execution on his judgment and summoned O. as garnishee, claiming that lie had agreed to buy in the property at sheriff’s sale and transfer it back to W. after he had received payment of his debt. W. testified that O. said “I want just what is due me, and as soon as I get it, I will turn the teams right over to you again.” W.’s testimony was confirmed by that of his attorney. Other witnesses for the plaintiff, however, testified that the real arrangement was that O. was to be trustee for the creditors, and that, on account of said arrangement, the other creditors did not bid at the sheriff’s sale. Held, that the evidence was insufficient to, sustain an agreement on the part of O. to return the property to W.</p>

Judges: Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.