Adams v. Day
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT, JUDGE WATTS PRESIDING. The plaintiffs instituted suit, by attachment, for the amount of a note due by the defendant, and'for two others not due. They allege, in their petition, “ that the defendants, S. & D. Day, reside in Philadelphia, and that an attachment has been levied on their property in this city, (New-Orleans) for said debt, already due, and those not yet due.”
Read the full summary
Eastern Dist. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT, JUDGE WATTS PRESIDING. The plaintiffs instituted suit, by attachment, for the amount of a note due by the defendant, and'for two others not due. They allege, in their petition, “ that the defendants, S. & D. Day, reside in Philadelphia, and that an attachment has been levied on their property in this city, (New-Orleans) for said debt, already due, and those not yet due.” They pray judgment for the debt due, and for the two remaining debts when they become due, and that the-attachment continue in the meantime. The attorney…
1Opinion of the CourtMorphy, J.
An attachment was taken out for a debt not yet due, under the act of 1826, amending the Code of Practice, which limited the right of sueing out attachments, to cases of debts actually due. The required affidavit was made, that defendants were about to remove their property out of the state before the maturity of the debt. A rule was taken on plaintiffs to show cause why the attachment should not be set aside, on the ground, that the facts set forth in the affidavit were untrue. . On the evidence adduced below, *505disproving the fact that the property attached was to be removed from the state…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Kellis v. FarberSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1988
- Police Jury of Caddo Parish v. Mayor of ShreveportSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1915
- State National Bank v. New Orleans Brewing Ass'nSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1897