Hamilton v. McConkey's Adm'r

Citations

• 83 Va. 533
• 2 S.E. 724
• 1887 Va. LEXIS 97

Syllabus

<p>1. .Execution—Stay ordinance—Receipt—Presumption.—A fi. fa. issued April 28th, 1861, cannot be presumed to have gone into the sheriff’s hands on or before April 30th° 1861, the date of the stay ordinance, in the absence of endorsement as to date of its receipt by sheriff, and of proof of such date.</p> <p>2. Idem—Omnia presumuntur recü acta fuisse.—Where such writ is returned “Not levied by reason of the stay law,” it will be presumed, in the absence of an endorsement or proof of the date of its receipt by •the sheriff, that it went into his hands after April 30th, 1861, in which case such return was valid.</p> <p>3. Idem-—Sufficient return.—Under Code 1860, ch. 186, ? 15, it is required that the officer shall return upon a writ of fi.fa. “whether the money is or cannot be made.” A return of “Not levied by reason of the stay law” is a return substantially that the money “cannot be made.”</p> <p>4. Idem.—Return—•Statute of limitations.—Under Code 1860, ch. 186, $ 12, the limitation within which an alias execution may be issued is twenty years, where there is “a return of an officer” ; and whether such return be true or false, sufficient or insufficient, is not a question which •can arise under said section.</p>