Churchill v. Fulliam
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Muscatine District Court. The action is upon an open account for goods, wares and merchandise, sold and delivered, and was commenced by-attachment. The material facts and errors assigned, appear from the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWoodward, J.
The error first assigned relates to the overruling defendant’s motion to dismiss the attachment. The attachment was sued out under the provisions of section 1852 of the Code, which provides that it may issue previous to the debt becoming due, when nothing but time is wanting to fix an absolute indebtedness, and when the petition, in addition to that fact, states that the defendant is about to dispose of his property with intent to defraud his creditors.
The motion to dissolve the attachment, assigns several reasons therefor. That relating to the bond being signed in the name of a partnership,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Danforth, Davis & Co. v. CarterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1855
- Hunt v. CollinsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1856
3Cited by10 opinions
- Frick v. KabakerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Creswell v. SlackSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Peck v. ParchenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
- Bullis v. EastonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Rottlesberger v. HanleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.