Clough v. Curtis
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. The writ as originally drawn appeared to command the officer “to attach the goods or estate of John W. Curtis and Spiller, both of Manchester in said county, traders and partners under the firm of Curtis & Spiller, to the value of three hundred dollars, and summon them,” &c.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The writ as originally drawn appeared to command the officer “to attach the goods or estate of John W. Curtis and Spiller, both of Manchester in said county, traders and partners under the firm of Curtis & Spiller, to the value of three hundred dollars, and summon them,” &c. The writ was altered by erasures with a pen and by interlineations, so that it commanded the officer “ to attach the goods or estate of John W. Curtis, of Manchester, in said county, trader, doing business under the firm of Curtis & Spiller, to the value of three hundred dollars, and summon him,” &c. The…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
A subsequent attaching creditor is not admitted to defend a suit in the name of his debtor as a matter of right. When it is said, as it sometimes has been, that his admission is discretionary with the court (Reynolds v. Damrell, 19 N. H. 394), the meaning is that he is admitted when the fact is duly found that justice requires his admission. He is not allowed to come in for the purpose of pleading in abatement, or to avail himself of mere matters of form, but to prevent the property of the debtor from being diverted from his creditors. And when the objection is one of substance, especially if…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Swift v. StevensSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1832
- Starr v. LyonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1825
3Cited by1 opinion
- Clough v. CurtisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1883