UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON-LINE

TAYLOR V. CARRYL, 61 U. S. 583 (1857)

61 U. S. 583

U.S. Supreme Court

Taylor v. Carryl, 61 U.S. 20 How. 583 583 (1857)

Taylor v. Carryl

61 U.S. (20 How.) 583

Syllabus

Where a vessel had been seized under a process of foreign attachment issuing from a state court in Pennsylvania, and a motion was pending in that court for an order of sale, a libel filed in the district court of the United States, for mariners' clubjuris

Page 61 U. S. 584

wages, and process issued under it, could not divest the authorities of the state of their authority over the vessel, and of the two sales made, one by the sheriff and one by the marshal, the sale by the sheriff must be considered as conveying the legal title to the property, and the sale by the marshal as inoperative.

Where property is levied upon, it is not liable to be taken by an officer acting under another jurisdiction.

The cases examined where conflicting claims against the same property are set up under the laws of the United States and under state laws.

The process of foreign attachment in Pennsylvania is identical with that which issues out of the district court of the United States sitting in admiralty.

The admiralty jurisdiction of the courts of the United States, although exclusive on some subjects, is concurrent upon others. The courts of common law deal with ships or vessels as with other personal property.

In order to give jurisdiction in rem, the seizure by the marshal must have been valid, and this was not the case when the vessel was, at the time of seizure, in the actual and legal possession of the sheriff.

The facts of the case are particularly stated in the opinion of the Court. clubjuris

Page 61 U. S. 591


ClubJuris.Com