Hoffman. v. Shields
Decision Date | 31 January 1870 |
Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
Parties | Thomas A. Hoffman et al. v. William II. Shields. |
1. It is necessary, in a bill to enforce a judgment lien by a surety, where such surety has paid the judgment, that the original judgment creditors, whose judgment he has paid, be made parties. Conway v. Odbert et al, 2 W. Va. Bep., 25.
2. Judgment creditors are necessary parties in proceedings to subject lands, upon which they are liens, to the payment of other judgment liens.
3. An order of publication is given which is held to be insufficient. This cause came from the circuit court of Taylor county. The bill was filed at July rules, 1864. The complainant sought to sell the real estate of the defendant, Thomas A. Hoffman, on account of having paid to John A. Rightmire and Isaac Carder, the amount of a judgment obtained by them on an injunction bond of the defendant Hoffman, in which the complainant was his surety. Rightmire and Carder were not made parties to the bill. It also failed to make all of the other judgment creditors of Hoffman, some of whom were non residents, parties. The order of publication, which was held insufficient against some of the non resident judgment creditors, was as follows:
"William II. Shields, vs. Thomas A. Hoffman, &c.
In Chancery.
It is unnecessary to give further statement, as the above comprises all the points decided by this court. Hoffman appealed to this court.
Hon. John A. Dille, judge of the circuit court of Taylor, presided on the hearing of the cause.
A. F. Haymond for the appellants. C. Boggess for the appellee.
Maxwell, J. * The first ground assigned as error is, that Rightmire and Carder, two of the home defendants,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Williams v. Grant County Court
...not present a proper case for the exercise of equity jurisdiction." This case is in conflict really with Kuhn v. The Board of Education, 4 W.Va. 490 and The Trustees of Clarksburg v. Goff, 5 W.Va. 498, and in reference to these cases President Haymond says, (page 168). " The question of jur......
- Marling v. Robrecht
-
Pickens v. Wood
...that Crim cannot enforce the lien of the state judgment for his benefit under the rule laid down in the case of Hoffman v. Shields, 4 W. Va. 490, because the state cannot be made defendant to the suit. It seems to us that this rule cannot be applied where a surety pays a judgment of his pri......
- Plaintiff v. County Court Of Grant Co..