Service  of  affidavit  of  title  in  a  third  person  claiming  property
was  held  good  under  section  216  of  former  Code  when  served  on
clerk  in  the  office  of  the  officer  having  the  property,  who  was  in
charge  of  the  office  business.  No  other  demand  is  necessary  to  the
maintenance  of  an  action  against  an  officer  than  the  service  of  affi-
davit and  notice  of  claim.  One  having  title  to  and  right  to  possession
of  property  taken  in  replevin,  who  has  presented  his  claim  in  pursu-
ance of  law,  may  maintain  an  action  against  the  sheriff  for  a  conver-
sion of  the  property.  When  the  officer  has  obtained  indemnity  he
IS  bound  to  keep  the  property  or  deliver  it  to  plaintiff ;  tlie  service
of  the  notice  of  claim  and  affidavit  si^spends  that  obligation  and
releases  him  from  it  unless  indemnity  is  given  ;  when  given,  the
obligation  again  attaches,  and  the  claim  of  the  person  entitled  to
the  property  is  valid,  the  officer  being  required  to  rely  upon  the
indemnity.  Manning  v.  Keenan,  73  N.  T.  45.  It  is  unnecessary
to  call  a  jury  in  such  eases.  Hasklns  v.  Kelly,  1  Abb.  (N.  S.)  63.
The  delivery  mentioned  in  this  section  is  not  a  formal  but  a  com-
plete manual  delivery,  so  that  nothing  further  remains  to  be  done.
Second  Nat.  Bank  v.  Dunn,  63  How.  435.  The  only  way  in  which
a  third  party  can  assert  his  title  to  goods  taken  bj'  the  sheriff  in
replevin  is  that  prescribed  in  Edgerton  v.  Boss,  6  Abb.  1 89.  Except
in  cases  where  the  property  was  not  that  described  in  the  affidavit,  or
where  it  was  taken  from  the  possession  of  a  person  other  than  the
defendant  or  his  agent.     King  v.  Orser,  4  Duer,  431.
