Legal Opinion

Weil v. Quam

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 28, 1911PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from District Court, Eddy county; BurTce, Judge. Action by L. H. Weil et al., doing business under the firm name of Weil, Doble, & Company, against T. B. Quam, doing business asQuam Clothing House. Erom an order dissolving an attachment, plaintiff appeals. One seeking to vacate an attachment must deny all grounds in the* affidavit on which it was issued.

Read the full summary

Appeal from District Court, Eddy county; BurTce, Judge. Action by L. H. Weil et al., doing business under the firm name of Weil, Doble, & Company, against T. B. Quam, doing business asQuam Clothing House. Erom an order dissolving an attachment, plaintiff appeals. One seeking to vacate an attachment must deny all grounds in the* affidavit on which it was issued. Hornick Drug Co. v. Lane, 1 S. D. 129, 45 N. W. 329; Lindquist v. Johnson, 12 S. D. 486, 81 N. W. 900. Where attachment is issued for levy on goods, for the purchase price • of which the action was brought, the goods must be…

1Opinion of the Court

Pollock, Special Judge.

This is an appeal from an order setting, aside an attachment. On the 26th day of May, 1909, plaintiffs, simultaneously with the commencement of an action, filed the following affidavit with the clerk of the court in which an attachment was issued,, and levied upon certain personal property belonging to the defendant... Omitting the venue and title, the affidavit is as follows:

“K., being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the attorney for the plaintiff in the above entitled action; that the defendant, T. R.. Quam, has absconded and concealed himself from his…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Murphy v. MontandonIdaho Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Fisk v. FrenchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Burris v. LandersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. William Deering & Co. v. WarrenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1890
  5. F. Mayer Boot & Shoe Co. v. FergusonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Northern Shoe Co. v. CeckaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Rieffer v. Home Indemnity Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
  3. Page v. SteinkeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Peterson v. OglandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Lanpher-Skinner Co. v. QuamNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911

1 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