Irwin v. Griffin

On the application to dissolve the attachment, Mrs. Irwin contended that because 'of conditions and restrictions upon her ownership of the hotel property, she was as a matter of law in nowise responsible for any negligence that may have existed with respect to its construction or maintenance at the time of the fire, and hence could not (as she insists) be lawfully found to be a debtor of the plaintiff in attachment.

The foregoing opinion as prepared by the Chief Justice rules in effect that such contention as to non-liability was not a proper matter for consideration by the judge on the issue…