Worth v. Knickerbocker Trust Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from W. B. Allen, J., May Term, 1909, of New HaN-oveb. Motion to discharge attachment and dismiss an action. It appeared, among other things, that plaint.iff, making claim for damages against the Knickerbocker Trust Company, a nonresident, and other principal defendants, resident and nonresident, on 14 January, 1909, instituted his action against them and caused an attachment to be issued in same, and levied on debts and obligations due to said company from certain…
Read the full summary
Appeal from W. B. Allen, J., May Term, 1909, of New HaN-oveb. Motion to discharge attachment and dismiss an action. It appeared, among other things, that plaint.iff, making claim for damages against the Knickerbocker Trust Company, a nonresident, and other principal defendants, resident and nonresident, on 14 January, 1909, instituted his action against them and caused an attachment to be issued in same, and levied on debts and obligations due to said company from certain others who joined in the aj>peal in the cause. Some time after said attachment was issued and levied, the defendant, the…
1Opinion of the Court
Hoke, J.,
after stating the facts: The objections chiefly urged against the validity of the order of attachment were: 1. That no actionable wrong was stated against the defendants, or either of them. 2. No such' actionable wrong was stated that an attachment would lie. But the Court is of opinion that neither position can be sustained. While the demand of plaintiff is set forth perhaps with some elaborateness of statement, the affidavits, as we interpret them, contain aver-ments to the effect that, by means of flattering and deceptive statements on the part of the principal defendants, or some…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Carew v. RutherfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Cheney v. PowellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
- Price v. . CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
- Mott v. DanforthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
- Sheppard v. Rockingham Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ponsonby v. Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
- In Re BradsherUnited States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2010