77 Pa. 103 | Pa. | 1875
delivered the opinion of the court,
Had the levy in question been of personal chattels it would have been invalid, for in such case it must be made by actual seizure, or at least in view of the goods.
The levy is certainly very inaccurate, but, as explained by the oral testimony, which was properly admitted, Hoffman v. Danner, 2 Harris 25, we are left in no doubt but that the leasehold, from which the money was made, was the same as that described in the said levy on the writ of the appellant.
According to this view of the case the auditor erred in not giving precedence to the writ of the Titusville Novelty Iron Works.
The decree of the court is therefore reversed, and it is ordered that the record be remitted for redistribution, and that the appellees pay the costs of this appeal.