Nelson v. Sanborn
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Foreign Attachment. Issue between the plaintiff and the claimant. The trustee wrote upon the back of the plaintiff’s writ and signed an acceptance of service as follows : “ I hereby accept service of this writ and waive all rights to service by copy,” and no other service of the writ was made upon him.
Read the full summary
Foreign Attachment. Issue between the plaintiff and the claimant. The trustee wrote upon the back of the plaintiff’s writ and signed an acceptance of service as follows : “ I hereby accept service of this writ and waive all rights to service by copy,” and no other service of the writ was made upon him. Shortly afterwards the defendant assigned the debt due to him from the trustee to the claimant, who objects that there was no legal service of the writ upon the trustee, and that therefore he cannot be charged.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
■ Service of the writ upon the trustee in the manner prescribed by the statute (G. L., c. 249, s. 3) is an attachment of the funds in his possession belonging to the defendant (Blaisdell v. Ladd, 14 N. H. 129, 130), and is an essential step in the proceedings by which the property is appropriated without the defendant’s consent to the payment of his debts. Russell v. Dyer, 40 N. H. 173 — S. C., 43 N. H. 396 ; Cahoon v. Coe, 57 N. H. 556. The trustee’s acceptance of service was not an attachment. It was not in his power to create a lien upon the defendant’s property. Compulsory payment under…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Morris v. SmithTennessee Supreme Court · 1849
- Whipple v. RobbinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Raymond v. Rockland Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1873
- Palmer v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
3Cited by4 opinions
- Corning v. RecordsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1898
- Altona v. DabneyOregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Barr v. WarnerOregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Shelters v. BoudreauSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891