{
  "id": 2104344,
  "name": "ARNOLD WHITFIELD vs. ROBERT JOHNSTON",
  "name_abbreviation": "Whitfield v. Johnston",
  "decision_date": "1841-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "473",
  "last_page": "474",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "1 Ired. 473"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "23 N.C. 473"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 254,
    "char_count": 3310,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.504,
    "sha256": "d3d4aa2fdc5a3681c47d138c2f8c943b097bcb389db6a44637df5e4e4d9593d5",
    "simhash": "1:8bebc461e607e204",
    "word_count": 590
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:26:26.827770+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "ARNOLD WHITFIELD vs. ROBERT JOHNSTON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Daniel, J.\nIt is true that a constable is justified by an execution, issued by a competent tribunal, in doing all acts commanded by the execution. But in this case the execution was not only attached to the proceedings, which shewed the defendant that there was no judgment to authorise the justice to issue the execution, but actually recited that the judgment had been vacated by appeal. He saw, then, that the execution was an act done, which was beyond the power of the justice, and that it was void. The defendant was aware that the justice had no authority to issue this execution^ and being thus apprised that it was void, we think that he is not justified under it. The judgment of non-suit must therefore be set aside, and judgment must be rendered for the plaintiff pursuant to the verdict.\nPer Curiam, Judgment accordingly.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Daniel, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "B. F. Moore for the plaintiff.",
      "J. H. Bryan for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "ARNOLD WHITFIELD vs. ROBERT JOHNSTON.\nWhen the proceedings before a magistrate, upon -which he issues an execution, are annexed to the execution, and it is apparent from them there is no judgment authorising an execution, the constable who has the execution, must take notice of that fact, and will be guilty of a trespass, if he proceeds to make a levy under the process.\nThis was on action of trespass vi et artnis, tried at Spring Term, 1841, of Martin Superior Court o\u00ed Law, before his honor Judge Settle. The action was brought to recover damages for seizing and selling the plaintiff\u2019s horse. It was admitted by the defendant that he did seize and sell the horse, but he insisted that he was justified in so doing by process, a copy of which is inserted below; and, by consent of the parties, the jury found all the issues in favor of the plaintiff, and assessed his damages to $ 100, subject to the opinion of the court as to the defendant\u2019s liability. I-Iis Hon- or being of opinion that the defendant was justified under the process, set aside the verdict, and the plaintiff, in submission to the opinion of the court, suffered judgment of non-suit to be entered against him, and appealed to the Supreme Court.\nCopy of the proceedings and process under which the defendant insisted he teas justified.\nState of North Carolina, )\nMartin County. \\\nTo any lawful Officer to execute:\nYou are hereby commanded to arrest the body of Arnold Whitfield, (if to be tound in your county,) so that you. have him before some justice for said county, at Hamilton on the 4th day of May, 1839, then- and there to answer John J. Lancaster, in an action of debt due by account to the amount of sixty doll ars.\nGiven under my hand and seal, this 15th day of April, 1839.\nJOHN LONG, \u00cdi-J-J\nOn the back of this warrant were the following endorsements:\nExecuted by\nROBERT JOHNSTON.\nJudgment against the defendant for ten dollars and costs. May 4th, 1839. . L. JOHNSTON.\nAn appeal craved and granted to the County Court next, by giving for security ASA. PRICE.\nAtttest, L. JOHNSON, J. P.\nWhereas an appeal has been prayed and granted, and a failure on the part of the justice ol the peace, I therefore grant an execution and require that you execute and sell as the law directs of the goods and chattels of the deft, for the amount of the within principal and costs.\nTHOMAS JONES, $T pT\u00a7 tC\u00bb\nThis the 28th day of October, 1839.\nB. F. Moore for the plaintiff.\nJ. H. Bryan for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0473-01",
  "first_page_order": 475,
  "last_page_order": 476
}