Shapleigh v. Roop
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Mahaska District Cov/rt. On the 12tb of December, 1857, the plaintiffs filed two petitions in the clerk’s office. The one, in common form, claiming to recover on a promissory note of $6é8,54, with interest after maturity, and laying his damages at one thousand dollars, which was not sworn to.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Mahaska District Cov/rt. On the 12tb of December, 1857, the plaintiffs filed two petitions in the clerk’s office. The one, in common form, claiming to recover on a promissory note of $6é8,54, with interest after maturity, and laying his damages at one thousand dollars, which was not sworn to. The other petition was for an attachment against the defendants, stating that they were indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of $671,09, which was then due, and setting forth the cause for an attachment under the act of 1853, and which is properly stated and is sworn to. The defendants…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodward, J.
— The cause for an attachment is well *526stated, under the act of 1853. But the principal objection raised is, that there are two petitions, whilst the attachment was made at the commencement of the action. The defendant urges that when the attachment is sued out in the beginning of the suit, there can be hut one petition ; and that the petition stating the cause of action, must contain the cause for the attachment, and must be sworn to.
We do not so understand the law. The proceedings in attachment are but auxiliary, and tbe petition for it may be either the original petition in the action, or a…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fletcher & Son v. GordonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1935