Duy v. Knowlton
| Decision Date | 28 October 1882 |
| Citation | 14 F. 107 |
| Parties | DUY, Receiver, etc., v. KNOWLTON. [1] |
| Court | United States Circuit Court, District of Indiana |
Claypool & Ketcham, for plaintiff.
Charles L. Holstein, U.S. Atty., for the marshal.
GRESHAM, D.J.
The usual process was issued in this case, directed to the marshal, commanding him to summon the defendant. The marshal refuses to serve the process until the proper fees are paid in advance or a deposit of money made for their security. A rule is asked against the marshall to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt for his refusal to serve the process.
In settling his accounts with the proper accounting officers of the treasury department, the marshal is charged with all fees earned by him, and from the amount thus earned he is allowed to retain for his personal compensation, over and above the necessary expenses of his office, including clerk hire and the amount allowed his deputies, any sum remaining, not exceeding $6,000. If any excess remains over and above the credits allowed by law, he is required to pay it into the treasury, whether the fees earned have been collected or not.
The marshal is therefore a public officer, charged with the duty of collecting funds for the United States, and when he is required to serve process (not in suits where the United States requires the service) he has a right to demand the payment of the proper fees in advance of the service performed. He need not wait and take the chances of collecting them on an execution. See Rev. St. 841 to 846, inclusive.
---------
Notes:
[1] Reported by Chas. H. McCarer, Asst. U.S. Atty.
---------
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brewer v. Hunter, 3478.
...v. United States, 73 App.D.C. 174, 118 F.2d 375. The Marshal had the right to demand such funds before service was made, Duy v. Knwolton, C.C., 14 F. 107 and his failure to make the service without the payment of the expenses did not constitute a denial of due The motion to subpoena the wit......
-
Cohn v. George
...for trial. Under federal practice the marshal may insist on payment of fees and expenses in advance of performing the service. Duy v. Knowlton, C.C., 14 F. 107. Brewer v. Hunter, 163 F.2d 341 (10th Cir., The marshal also is entitled to collect payment in advance for payments for keepers, pu......
-
The Georgeanna
...the clerk and the marshal are authorized to demand payment of their statutory fees in advance. Cavender v. Cavender, 10 F. 828; Duy v. Knowlton, 14 F. 107. By twenty-ninth rule of the supreme court in bankruptcy, it is provided that the 'fees of the register, marshal, and clerk shall be pai......
- Norton v. City of Dover