Cook v. Rochford

Sale—Delivery—Attaching Creditors.—In an Action Against a Sheriff for the recovery of property attached by him as that of one C., where it is claimed that C. sold the property to plaintiff before the attachment, testimony of plaintiff and 0. to the effect that on a day-named prior to the attachment C, sold the property to plaintiff, taking his promissory note in payment, and gave him a bill of sale of the property, viz., saloon furniture and stock; that 0. delivered to plaintiff the keys of the safe and the saloon, took his account-book, and left, and has had nothing to do with the business since, and that plaintiff has continued to own the property, and carry on the business, up to the time of the levy of the attachment; that there was but one advertisement in any paper authorized by C., and that was changed on the day of the sale by the insertion of plaintiff’s name in the place of that of C.; that the advertisements that appeared in various other papers were not changed; that the sale was made in good faith; that the plaintiff was C.’s bar-tender at the time of the sale, and the business was conducted after the transfer just as it had been before, plaintiff continuing to tend bar; held, insufficient evidence of an immediate delivery and continued change of possession of the property in controversy.