Legal Opinion

Hughes, Adm'r v. . Person and Others

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 5, 1869PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Motions, to vacate an order of arrest, and to discharge an-attachment, made before Watts, J., at Noethampton, at Spring-Term, 1869. The allegation upon which the order, and attachment had been granted, was (so far as material here) as follows: “That the said Thomas J. Person has disposed of and; secreted his property, with intent to defraud his creditors.” His Honor allowed the motions, and the plaintiff appealed..

Read the full summary

Motions, to vacate an order of arrest, and to discharge an-attachment, made before Watts, J., at Noethampton, at Spring-Term, 1869. The allegation upon which the order, and attachment had been granted, was (so far as material here) as follows: “That the said Thomas J. Person has disposed of and; secreted his property, with intent to defraud his creditors.” His Honor allowed the motions, and the plaintiff appealed.. The affidavit to obtain a warrant of attachment, mnst be explicit; and made, in general, upon positive knowledge of the deponent so far as to establish a prima facie case, Hoff.…

1Opinion of the CourtReade, J.

His Honor “ vacated the order of arrest, and-discharged the attachment ” “ in consequence of the insufficiency of the affidavit upon which they were issued.” and.from this there was an appeal.

There were many points presented in the argument at this bar, but we consider that only upon which the case was disposed of below, — the sufficiency of the affidavit.

The words in the Code are “ removed or disposed of,” &c. The words in the affidavit are “disposed of and secreted, &c.” It was objected, not that the change of the words would make any material difference, but that it would not be sufficient…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Peebles v. FooteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
  2. Hanna v. . HannaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
  3. Clark v. . ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870
  4. Brown, Daniel & Co. v. HawkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1871
  5. Judd v. Crawford Gold Mining Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1897

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API