Talk:Krippendorf v. Hyde/Opinion of the Court

This page is part of a WikiProject to improve the United States Supreme Court case pages. To participate see the project page.

Information about this edition
Edition:	Krippendorf v. Hyde, to be due for goods and merchandise sold, and levied a writ of attachment issued therein on a stock of goods in the city of Indianapolis, as the property of Frey & Magg, which was in the possession of the appellant, and of which, at the time, as he alleges, he was owner The property was appraised as required by the statutes of Indiana, and its value returned at the sum of $13,16564 The goods were returned to the appellant on his giving to the marshal a delivery bond, conditioned to properly keep and take care of the property, and deliver the same to the marshal on demand, of so much thereof as might be required to be sold on execution to satisfy any judgment which might be recovered against the defendants in the action, or to pay the appraised value of the property, not exceeding the amount of the judgment and costs The appellant was made on his own motion a party defendant to the suit in order to assert his title, but on motion of the plaintiff, his name was stricken from the record without prejudice to his right to enforce his claim in some other form Such further proceedings were then had, that, as provided by the statute, a large number of the creditors of Frey & Maag came into the attachment suit for the purpose of obtaining judgments and participating in the distribution of the fund arising from the sale of the attached property Judgment was subsequently rendered therein in favor of the original plaintiffs, and of these several creditors, respectively, and it was ordered that the attached property be sold by the marshal for the satisfaction thereof The appellant, as required by the condition of his bond, not being able to return the specific property attached, paid to the marshal the full amount of its appraised value He thereupon, the money being in the marshal's hands, undistributed, filed this bill, to which all the parties in the attachment suit, and the marshal, are made defendants, praying that the marshal be restrained from paying the said fund, or any part thereof, to the creditors in the attachment suit, and that the same be adjudged to belong to the appellant, and paid to him accordingly .
Source:	Krippendorf v. Hyde from http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/US/110
Contributor(s):	BenchBot
Level of progress:	Text being edited
Notes:	Gathered and wikified using an automated tool. See this documentation for more information.
Proofreaders:

Start a discussion about Krippendorf v. Hyde/Opinion of the Court

Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikisource the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve Krippendorf v. Hyde/Opinion of the Court.

Start a discussion