Ziegler v. The Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 01 July 1849 |
| Citation | 12 Pa. 227 |
| Parties | ZIEGLER v. The COMMONWEALTH. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Graham, for plaintiff in error.—At common law it is not the duty of the prothonotary to give such certificates: 1 Sug. Vend. 552; and there is no allowance for it in the fee bill, nor any direction to give them in any Act of Assembly. The certificate is not evidence of a judgment: 2 H. & John. 132; 14 Pick. 448; and it is a nullity without the seal of the Court: 1 Stark. R. 525. The absence of the seal is evidence that the clerk had not been paid for his services.
Fetterman, contrà.—The Act of Assembly does allow a fee, and an action lies for it: 4 Binn. 172. Such officers may give a negative certificate: 2 Rawle, 236; and are liable for their correctness: 3 W. & S. 26. The seal is indifferent, for this has nothing to do with the questions of evidence of what is on the record.
BURNSIDE, J. (after stating the case).
In support of the first alleged error, it is contended that there is no Act of Assembly which makes it the duty of the prothonotary to make searches and give certificates of the liens of judgments, and this duty is performed in England by solicitors. In Pennsylvania it has ever been a portion of the duty of a prothonotary; it is an incident to his office as a keeper of the records of the county. The fee bill gives him compensation for searches and for certificates. He is the fit person to make such examinations, and the only person that the common law of the State recognises for that purpose, and responsible for the safe keeping of the records and papers of his office.
The second question (whether the certificate is such an one as renders him liable on the official bond) is equally plain. [His honour here stated the facts.] The defence is that the prothonotary neglected his duty in not putting the seal of the Court to his certificate, and that there is no evidence that he was paid for the search and certificate, Melvin having left the country. If the officer neglected to charge for the search and certificate, which is not very probable, it was his own affair. Omitting a portion of his duty in not putting the seal of his office to the certificate, will not avail him. Our law will not permit him to take the advantage of his own negligence, and enable him by that negligence to mislead others.
The certificate was well calculated to mislead, and being untrue, he is answerable for the injury it caused. It was an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. to Use of Orris v. Roberts
...cited by the plaintiff ostensibly on the question of the prothonotary's vicarious liability for his subordinate's mistake (Ziegler v. Commonwealth, 12 Pa. 227; Van Etten v. Commonwealth, 102 Pa. 596; Wilson v. Arnold, 172 Pa. 264, 33 A. 552; and Commonwealth v. Cruikshank, 251 Pa. 390, 96 A......
-
Raitport v. Provident Nat. Bank
...535, 5 A. 227 (1886); Siewers v. Commonwealth ex rel. Hauseman, 87 Pa. 15 (1878); Watson v. Smith, 26 Pa. 395 (1856); Ziegler v. Commonwealth, 12 Pa. 227 (1849); Bear v. Patterson, 3 Watts & Serg. 233, 237 (1842) (dictum); Crutcher v. Commonwealth, 6 Whart. 340, 348 (1841) (dictum); Work v.......
-
State ex rel. Chester, Perryville & Ste. Genevieve Railway Company v. Turner
... ... rel. v. O'Gorman, 75 Mo. 379; Howard v ... U.S. 102 F. 77, 42 C. C. A. 269; Ziegler v ... Conn., 12 Pa. 227; Selover v. Sheardown, 72 Am. St. Rep ... 627, 73 Minn. 393, 76 N.W. 50 ... STURGIS, ... J ... ...
-
Mallory v. Ferguson
...delegate to do the work." Mart. Abs. of Titles, 183; Gerard, Titles to Real Est. 757; 33 HOW 247; 70 Ill. 268; Shearman & R. Neg., § 288; 12 Pa. 227. See, also, 15 Cent. Law J. 482; 95 U.S. 439; 16 Am. Eng. Encyc. of Law, 389; 5 Ill. 395. It may be urged that, because the defendant did not ......