United States Capsule Co. v. Isaacs
Indiana Court of Appeals
Erom the Marion Superior Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Wiley, C. J. —
The appellees, Solomon Isaacs, Emil Cal-men and Gustav B. CaTmon, under the firm name of S. Isaacs and Company, commenced their action in attachment against appellant. Their complaint was in three paragraphs. With the complaint an affidavit of attachment was filed, a writ duly issued and levied upon certain real estate. Counsel for appellant thereupon entered their special appearance and moved to quash the writ of attachment. This motion was based upon two reasons: (1) “Because it does not appear from the affidavit that there is property of the defendant within the jurisdiction…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Martin v. MartinIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Jeffersonville, Madison, & Indianapolis R. R. v. HendricksIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
- Hibernia Ins. v. St. Louis & New Orleans Transp. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1882
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Third National Bank of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Blair v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Halbert v. HENDRIXIndiana Court of Appeals · 1950
- Fostoria Milling & Grain Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928
- Transcontinental Credit Corp. v. James SimkinIndiana Court of Appeals · 1972
- Indianapolis Traction & Terminal Co. v. SpringerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911
- Fostoria Milling & Grain Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.