Legal Opinion

Durand v. Carrington

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided January 15, 1792PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Action on note by attachment. Plea in abatement — That the plaintiff commenced another action by attachment prayed out and served previous to the present writ, for the same canse, matter and thing. Reply — -That said first attachment was not legally served so as to hold the estate taken thereby; and the plaintiff discovering said defect, prayed out the present writ of attachment, to secure his debt and that he did not answer in or pursue said first action. Demurrer.

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment — Reply sufficient — for that the second writ is not for vexation; but to secure the plaintiff’s debt.

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Halpern v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  2. Quinebaug Bank v. TarboxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1850
  3. Glasser, Kuder & Ottensoser v. HackettSupreme Court of Florida · 1896
  4. Wilson v. Atlanta, Knoxville & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  5. Gamsby v. RaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1872