Morgan v. People

Citations

• 59 Ill. 58

Syllabus

<p>1. Execution—who may control it. Ah execution is the process of the plaintiff therein; and he has the right to control it without any interference on the part of attorney or officer.</p> <p>2. Officer—liability for disregarding instructions of plaintiff in execution. Where an officer sells property contrary to the instructions of the plaintiff to suspend the sale, hg thereby incurs a liability to the defendant in the execution, for the damage sustained by reason thereof.</p> <p>3. So, it is no answer to the declaration, in an action of debt on a sheriff’s bond, where the breach assigned is, that the officer sold property of the defendant in the execution, after being ordered by the plaintiff to suspend the sale, that the property was so sold by virtue of such execution, in the hands of the officer, against the goods and chattels of said defendant.</p> <p>4. Nor is it a defense that the sale was so made by direction of the plaintiff’s attorney, it not appearing but that the attorney may have violated the orders of the plaintiff.</p> <p>5. Same—receiving instructions by telegraph. It is competent for the plaintiff in an execution, to direct the' sheriff by telegraph, to suspend a sale thereunder.</p> <p>6. Evidence—telegraphic dispatch. In such case, the telegram delivered to the sheriff at the end of the line is the original message—is evidence of its contents, and obligatory upon the officer.</p> <p>7. The question as to what is the original message, depends upon whose agent the telegraph is. Where the party sending a message is the responsible party, and sends a message for the purpose of giving directions to be acted upon, then the message delivered at the end of the line is the original.</p>