Legal Opinion

Brown v. Ridgway

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 2, 1848PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. A foreign attachment against the defendant having been executed, he moved to quash, on affidavits which were filed and brought up on writ of error to the judgment or order quashing the writ.

1Per curiam

The true reason why error does not lie in foreign attachment, was given by Chief Justice Tilghman, in Lewis v. Wallick. A judgment against the defendant is only *43interlocutory: for the attachment may be dissolved after judgment by his death, or by putting in bail to the action. When, however, an attachment is dissolved because it issued irregularly, as where the property was not a subject of foreign attachment, the proceeding is at an end for every purpose, as it was in Miller v. Sprecher, and the order is final; but then the plaintiff in error is met by another principle of equal potency,…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Pasquinelli v. Southern Macaroni Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Plains Township Election ReturnsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Holland v. WhiteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
  4. Nicoll v. McCaffreySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  5. Badler v. L. Gillarde Sons Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API