Myers v. Urich
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
THISwas an action of debt on a bond, brought in the Cornmon Pleas of Dauphin county to November term 1792; and the plea was payment, with leave to give in evidence ~paym~nt a foreign attachment.
Read the full summary
THISwas an action of debt on a bond, brought in the Cornmon Pleas of Dauphin county to November term 1792; and the plea was payment, with leave to give in evidence ~paym~nt a foreign attachment. Upon Upon the trial of the cause before Teates and S?nitl~ justices, at a Nisi Prius in October 17991 the following facts were in evidence. foreign attachment, returnable to February term 1790 issued at the suit of James Kelly assignee of Abraham Ebersoid against .17lyers the present plaintiff; by virtue of which the amount of a bond owing to Myers but not yet due, was attached the hands of Urkh the…
1Per curiam
The ground of the defence is that Urich was compelled by due course of law to pay the amount of the bond to the plaintiff in the foreign attachment; but the fact is that he was not compelled by due course of law; for he could not be legally compelled unless the proceedings against him were regular, and the security required by the act of Assembly was duly entered.
Judgment for Plaintiff.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Adams v. FilerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- McPhail & Co. v. HyattSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Wood v. LudwigSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1820
- Hall v. KnappSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1845