Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Thomas M. Hyde and C.A. Zaring, both of Basin, for plaintiff in error. This action is similar to the case of Lynch v. Burgess No. 1527. It was brought for damages against the sheriff and his surety for an illegal search made of the premises and upon affidavits of the plaintiff. The search warrant was involved because issued upon an illegal affidavit; the search was very unreasonable. United States v. Batun, 292 Fed. 497; United States v. Bateman, 278 Fed. 231. Any search made under a pretended warrant, not in conformity with the constitution is unreasonable. State v. George, 231 P. 683. State v. Court, 225 P. 1000. The constitutional provision extends to the person, his baggage and personal belongings. State v. Court, 225 P. 1000-1002; State v. Court, (Mont.) 225 P. 862. This case is almost identical upon the facts with that of Buckley v. Beaulieu, 104 Me. 56, 22 L.R.A. (N.S.) 819. In the case last cited, the search was made in a disorderly manner. Jackson v. Harries, (Utah) 236 P. 234. A surety on a sheriff's bond is liable for a wrongful act of the sheriff done under color of his office. Campbell v. People, 154 Ill. page 601, 39 N.E. 579. Thos. McKinney, Ray E. Lee, and Samuel M. Lee, for defendants in error. Counsel for defendants in error submitted this case upon the same points and authorities as were presented in the case of Lynch v. Burgess, sheriff, No. 1527.
Judges
  • RINER, Justice.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Thomas M. Hyde and C.A. Zaring, both of Basin, for plaintiff in error. This action is similar to the case of Lynch v. Burgess No. 1527. It was brought for damages against the sheriff and his surety for an illegal search made of the premises and upon affidavits of the plaintiff. The search warrant was involved because issued upon an illegal affidavit; the search was very unreasonable. United States v. Batun, 292 Fed. 497; United States v. Bateman, 278 Fed. 231. Any search made under a pretended warrant, not in conformity with the constitution is unreasonable. State v. George, 231 P. 683. State v. Court, 225 P. 1000. The constitutional provision extends to the person, his baggage and personal belongings. State v. Court, 225 P. 1000-1002; State v. Court, (Mont.) 225 P. 862. This case is almost identical upon the facts with that of Buckley v. Beaulieu, 104 Me. 56, 22 L.R.A. (N.S.) 819. In the case last cited, the search was made in a disorderly manner. Jackson v. Harries, (Utah) 236 P. 234. A surety on a sheriff's bond is liable for a wrongful act of the sheriff done under color of his office. Campbell v. People, 154 Ill. page 601, 39 N.E. 579. Thos. McKinney, Ray E. Lee, and Samuel M. Lee, for defendants in error. Counsel for defendants in error submitted this case upon the same points and authorities as were presented in the case of Lynch v. Burgess, sheriff, No. 1527.
Judges
  • RINER, Justice.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

SHOMO v. BURGESS

RINER, Justice.

Nothing has been submitted in argument for the disposition of this case different from that presented in case No. 1527 just decided. The same briefs have been used by the parties in both causes, and the questions presented are identical. It follows that the order in the instant case must be the same as in case No. 1527, upon the authority of the opinion therein filed.

Reversed and Remanded.

BLUME, C.J., and KIMBALL, J., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

SHOMO v. BURGESS
(Mar 12, 1929)