
    Philip Colby versus Pitt Dillingham and Others.
    A coroner, who is also deputy sheriff, may serve process upon another deputy of the sheriff.
    In a" case stated by the parties in this action, it was agreed that the defendant Dillingham is a deputy sheriff for this county; that the original writ in the action was directed to the coroners of the county, or any of them, and was served on all the defendants by Daniel Evans, a coroner for the county, duly qualified, and also a deputy sheriff of the same county, occasionally executing the duties of each of those offices.
    If the Court should be of opinion that Evans could servo said writ, and that the service thereof by him as coroner, was correct and legal, it was agreed that judgment should be rendered for the plaintiff for a sum stated; otherwise the plaintiff should become nonsuit, and the defendants recover their costs.
   The Court

observed that it was improper to bring a matter, which, if there was any question upon it, was proper for a plea in abatement to the writ, before them in the form of a case stated. But, as the question regarded practice, and they entertained no doubts upon it, they would express their opinion, that Evans, in his character of coroner, might well serve the writ. The sheriff was answerable for his conduct as one of his deputies, but not for his doings as a coroner.

Judgment for the plaintiff.  