Fountain v. 624 Pieces of Timber

Citations

• 140 F. 381
• 1904 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8

Syllabus

<p>1. Federal and State Courts — Priority of Jurisdiction — Seizure of Property under Process.</p> <p>The possession of the officer of a court under legal process is the possession* of the court, and property seized by a sheriff under a process of attachment from a state court, while in the custody of the officer, cannot be seized or taken from him under process from a federal court; but, to give the state court priority of jurisdiction, there must have been a valid seizure and actual control taken of the res.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For eases in point, see vol. 13, Cent. Dig. Courts, §§ 1386-1390.</p> <p>Conflicting jurisdiction of state and federal courts, see note to Louisville Trust Co. v. City of Cincinnati, 22 C. C. A. 356.]</p> <p>2. Attachment — Mode and Sufficiency of Levy.</p> <p>A deputy sheriff, having a writ of attachment from a state court which he designed to levy on a raft of timber in a public boom, went in a boat near the raft, which was pointed out to him by the owner of the boom, but did not go upon it, nor count the timber, nor assume possession, merely making arrangement with the boom owner to count the timbers and report to him. Held, that no valid levy was made, and that a subsequent seizure of the timber by a marshal under process from a court of admiralty gave that court jurisdiction of the property.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 5, Cent. Dig.' Attachment, §§ 464-468.]</p>