Lucas v. Laws, Rhodes & Barr
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action brought by Laws, Rhodes & Barr to recover the price of certain Hour sold by them to Samuel H. Lucas. William Rhodes, one of the plaintiffs, was also a member of the firm of S. Cook & Co., who were indebted to S. McClurkan & Co. McClurkan & Co. issued a foreign attachment for their claim against Cook & Co., making Lucas garnishee.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action brought by Laws, Rhodes & Barr to recover the price of certain Hour sold by them to Samuel H. Lucas. William Rhodes, one of the plaintiffs, was also a member of the firm of S. Cook & Co., who were indebted to S. McClurkan & Co. McClurkan & Co. issued a foreign attachment for their claim against Cook & Co., making Lucas garnishee. Rhodes appeared to the attachment, and a verdict was rendered against him, and judgment accordingly. Immediately afterwards plaintiffs brought this action. Defendant filed an affidavit, setting np…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Lewis, C. J.
Laws, Rhodes & Barr brought this action for a just debt. The defence is that the firm of McClurkan & Co. have attached the debt due by Lucas to answer a demand which they have against the firm of Cook, Rhodes & Thomas. The demand which McClurkan & Co. have against Rhodes, so far as the plaintiffs below are concerned, must be regarded as an individual debt of Rhodes. His interest in the partnership claims is all that can be attached for his individual debts. What is his interest in the partnership claims of Laws, Rhodes & Barr? Nothing more…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Dengler v. BuettnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889