Exchange National Bank v. Clement
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Tried before the Hon. Thomas M. Arrington. An attachment, unless there is personal service, or a voluntary appearance, is strictly a proceeding in rern, notwithstanding its form is in-personam, and is operative only on and against the the property seized. — Heidritta v. Elizabeth Oil Cloth Co., 112 U. S. 300. A long line of authorities hold that such a judgment is an absolute nullity as fixing a personal liability beyond…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Tried before the Hon. Thomas M. Arrington. An attachment, unless there is personal service, or a voluntary appearance, is strictly a proceeding in rern, notwithstanding its form is in-personam, and is operative only on and against the the property seized. — Heidritta v. Elizabeth Oil Cloth Co., 112 U. S. 300. A long line of authorities hold that such a judgment is an absolute nullity as fixing a personal liability beyond the']proceeds of the property attached. — Pennoyer v. Xeff, 95 U. S. 7 14; Brooklyn v. Ins. Co., 99 U. S. 363; Ins. Co. v. Bangs,…
1Opinion of the CourtBrickell, C. J.
The appellant, a corporation having its domicil in the State of Washington, on the 23rd day of March, 1894, sued out a writ of attachment against Emma Clement, a resident citizen of the same State, returnable into the city court of Montgomery, which was on the day of its issue by the sheriff levied on certain real'estate, situate in the city of Montgomery, as the property of the defendant; and, with the levy thereon endorsed, was duly returned into the city court. At the return term, an attorney, appearing specially for the defendant, moved the court to discharge che levy of the attachment,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- St. Clair v. CoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Freeman v. AldersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Cooper v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
- Betancourt v. EberlinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
- Sims, Harrison & Co. v. Jacobson & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1874
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Sweeney v. TritschSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Montgomery Enterprises v. Empire Theater Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1920
- Turnipseed v. BlanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Pullman Palace Car Co. v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Oliver v. KinneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.