Marshall v The Letterkenny Railway Company

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 18 December 1866
• Date: 18 December 1866
• Court: Rolls Court (Ireland)

Rolls.

MARSHALL

and

THE LETTERKENNY RAILWAY CO.

Bowyer v. Blair Fl. & K. 385.

152 CHANCERY REPORTS. 1866. Rolls. I MARSHALL v. THE LETTERKENNY RAILWAY CO. Dec. 18. A party who THE petitioner sued out a writ of fieri facias, bearing date the 5th had sued out of November 1866, and directed to the Sheriff of the county of a writ offs. fa. having declin- Donegal, whereby he was commanded to levy the sum of £518, with ed to indem nify the Sheriff interest, from the goods and chattels of the respondents, the Letter against claims made to goods kenny Railway Company. The writ was returnable on the 5th of seized by him, the Court ex- February 1867. The Sheriff seized certain goods which he believed tended the time for re- to belong to the Company, and remained in possession of them. turning the writ, with li- Claims to the property were made by John M'Grotty, who stated berty to the Sheriff to ap- that he was put in charge of it by the Court of Bankruptcy and ply to be dis- Insolvency, and by Mr. G. K. Smith, as the solicitor of Messrs. charged from making a re Bateman & Co., who stated that some permanent rails which had turn, if, before the extended been seized by the Sheriff remained their property under a special period expired, the party did contract. The Sheriff adjourned the sale, and applied to the peti not give him an indemnity, tioner's solicitor for an indemnity ; but he declined to interfere in or take pro ceedings to re- the matter, and required the Sheriff to do his duty. strain actions by the claimÂants against the Sheriff. Mr. Carson now moved, on behalf of the Sheriff, that the time for making a return to the writ offi. fa. might be enlarged, until the Argument. petitioner should give him an indemnity against the claims made by Mr. M'Grotty and Messrs. Bateman & Co., or until the right in the property in the said goods should have been ascertained by the petiÂtioner; or that the petitioner should be compelled to withdraw the writ ; or that the Sheriff should be discharged from making a return to the writ ; and for the costs of the motion. Bowyer v. Blair (a) was cited in support of the motion. Mr. H. Fitz Gibbon, for the Railway Company. The MASTER OF THE ROLLS made the following order : It is ordered, by the Right Hon. the MASTER OF THE ROLLS, that the time for making a return to the writ of fa., (a) Fl. & K. 385, CHANCERY REPORTS. 153 bearing date the 5th day of November last, which issued in this matter, at the suit of the...