National Exchange Bank v. Rook Granite Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
_ Appeal from 0. H. Allen, J., at tbe March Term, 1911, of ANSON. Civil action beard on motion to discharge an attachment and dismiss the case.
Read the full summary
_ Appeal from 0. H. Allen, J., at tbe March Term, 1911, of ANSON. Civil action beard on motion to discharge an attachment and dismiss the case. It appeared that plaintiff bank, holding two promissory notes, past due, one for $400, dated 12 August, 1909, and another for $300, 31 August, 1909, made by defendant, the Rook Granite Company and endorsed by W. H. Rook and his wife, M. W. Rook, non-residents of this State, instituted action thereon in the Superior Court of Anson County, and an attachment in said suit having been duly issued, the same was levied on a lot of real estate, lying and…
1Opinion of the Court
Hoke, J".,
after stating the case. "Where an attachment or the levy on property under it forms the sole basis of the court’s jurisdiction, the authorities are very generally agreed that the discharge of the writ requires the dismissal of the action. 4th Cyc., pp. 805, 806; 3 A. & E., p. 244. There would seem, therefore, to be no valid objection to the judgment, so far as the form is concerned. We are of opinion, however, that on the facts presented there was error in the ruling that the property of defendant M. W. Rook was not subject to attachment. While the common-law disability of married…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Scudder v. Union National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Equitable Life Assurance Society v. ClementsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Dougherty v. . SprinkleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
- Armstrong, Cator & Co. v. BestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Ivey v. Kern County Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bluthenthal & Beckart, Inc. v. KennedySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Adams v. Trepanier Lumber Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1927