Starr v. Carrington
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was a scire-f 'acias, in a process of foreign attachment, against the defendant, as the trustee and debtor of John Me Lean. A copy of the writ in the original suit was left in service with the defendant, on the 7th of February, 1818. The cause was tried at Danbury, September term 1819, before Ch. J. Hosmer. Some years ago, McLean, the absconding debtor, being in the state of Ohio, bought a horse of one Samuel Ditty, for 'which he gave his note for 80 dollars.
Read the full summary
This was a scire-f 'acias, in a process of foreign attachment, against the defendant, as the trustee and debtor of John Me Lean. A copy of the writ in the original suit was left in service with the defendant, on the 7th of February, 1818. The cause was tried at Danbury, September term 1819, before Ch. J. Hosmer. Some years ago, McLean, the absconding debtor, being in the state of Ohio, bought a horse of one Samuel Ditty, for 'which he gave his note for 80 dollars. This note was after-wards sent to Isaac Mills, Esq. of. New-Haven, in Connecticut, for collection; by whom it was put in suit, by…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
The general proposition to be established in. support of the decision of the superior court, is this, that at the time the foreign attachment was left in service with the defendant, he was the debtor of John McLean. Four distinct objections have been made, by the defendant. 1. That the money never belonged to John McLean, but to his mother Deborah. 2. That it is the right of Dilly, who has never relinquished it. 3. That it never came into the hands oí the defendant; or if it did, the debt was extinguished by his note. 4. And that it is really the right of John A. McLean.
1. With…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Levy v. Bank of United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1802
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sutherland v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1911