Calhoun v. Cozzens
Supreme Court of Alabama
THIS was a suit by attachment for the recovery-of the amount of a promissory, note, by the defendant in error against the plaintiff] in the Circuit Court of Tuskaloosa.
Read the full summary
THIS was a suit by attachment for the recovery-of the amount of a promissory, note, by the defendant in error against the plaintiff] in the Circuit Court of Tuskaloosa. The affidavit, after properly describing the amount and evidence of the indebtedness affirms “ that said Ewing F. Calhoun resides out of this State, so that the ordinary process of law cannot be served on him, and further, that said Ewing F. has not sufficient property within the State where he resides, in the knowledge of affiant, wherefrom to satisfy said debt; and that an attachment is not sued out for the purpose of vexing…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
It is insisted by the plaintiff in error, that the proceedings in this cause were instituted under the ninth section of the act of 1833, “concerning attachments.” Aik. D. 40. That section gives to a non-resident creditor the benefit of an attachment against his non-resident debtor, in the same manner as if he resided within this State: “Provided, that such non-resident, shall give good and sufficient security, residing in this State, to be approved by the Judge of the County Court, where the property or effects may be, or any Judge or Clerk of the Circuit Court, for the amount, and with the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Loomis v. AllenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845