Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Phillips v. Hyde
Citations: 1 U.S. 439; 1 Dall. 439
Court: Supreme Court of the United States; June 1, 1789; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court
In Phillips v. Hyde, the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia addressed a debt case involving a Replevin bond following a judgment of return habends. The plaintiff's attorney, Sergeant, sought to present witnesses to demonstrate that the goods had been tendered to the plaintiff, thereby fulfilling the Replevin bond's condition. However, Levy opposed this, arguing that evidence contradicting the sheriff's return could not be admitted, referencing established legal precedents. Sergeant acknowledged that certain sheriff returns are not subject to challenge but argued that the return of Elongatur was not one of those. Ultimately, the court ruled against the admission of the evidence. The court then considered whether the jury could include costs incurred during the Replevin in their verdict for this action. The court concluded that the jury could and should include these costs, which aligned with the jury's verdict. Sergeant pointed out that similar issues had been addressed in the case of Jackson v. Webb, to which President Shippen noted that those matters had been left to the court based on equitable considerations.