Legal Opinion

Summers v. Glancey

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1834PublishedCited by 3 opinions

APPEAL from the SKelby Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtM’Kinney, J.

Domestic attachment. In this case it appears that the defendant moved to quash the writ, on the ground that it appeared from the condition of the bond, that the writ was issued before the bond was filed in the clerk’s office; and that the plaintiff 'then moved the Court to permit the clerk to endorse upon the bond, nunc jaro tunc, that the same was filed, executed, acknowledged, and approved, according to law, before the writ issued. The Court sustained the defendant’s motion, and quashed the writ, refused the plaintiff’s motion, and further refused, upon the plaintiff’s introducing…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Satterwhite v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1856
  2. Gayle v. HudsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
  3. Root v. MonroeIndiana Supreme Court · 1841

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API