Askew v. . Stevenson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Motion to dismiss an attachment, heard before Shi The process was issued February 22d, 1865, by the Clerk of the Superior Court, and directed “To any lawful officer to execute and return within thirty days from the date hereof, (Sundays excepted,) ” but in the body of the writ it was returnable to the succeeding March Term of the court. It was placed in the hands of the sheriff, who levied the same February 24th, 1865, on certain property oí the defendant, real and personal.
Read the full summary
Motion to dismiss an attachment, heard before Shi The process was issued February 22d, 1865, by the Clerk of the Superior Court, and directed “To any lawful officer to execute and return within thirty days from the date hereof, (Sundays excepted,) ” but in the body of the writ it was returnable to the succeeding March Term of the court. It was placed in the hands of the sheriff, who levied the same February 24th, 1865, on certain property oí the defendant, real and personal. The attchment recited that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $770, or thereabouts. No term of…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
It is settled, both upon reason and authority, that the statute which gives an attachment must be construed strictly. State Bank v. Hinton, 1 Dev., 397; Leak v. Moorman, ante, p. 168. Still it is not to be abated for mere want of form, if the essential matters expressed in the prescribed form are set forth; see the last clause of the 4th section of the 7th chapter of the Revised Code. The objection urged against the precept of the attachment in the present case is, “ that it is directed to any constable or other lawful officer to execute and return within thirty days from the date hereof,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Pierce v. . MallardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- State v. . HortonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898