Danielson v. Andrews

Wilde J.,

in delivering the opinion of the Court, said, that this seemed to be within the discretion of the judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and that this Court did not think proper to overrule the amendment.3 It struck him, that it would dissolve the attachment, where there is a subsequent attachment.4

See McLellan v. Crofton, 6 Greenl. 307, 328; Bogart v. McDonald, 2 Johns. Cas. 219.

See Putnam v. Hall, 3 Pick. 445.