Cobb v. Force, Bros. & Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Weit of error to the Circuit Court of Randolph county. Assumpsit on two promissory notes. The suit was commenced by attachment. The affidavit was made by an agent, who swears that the defendant is a non-resident, and that he has not within the State of his residence, within the knowledge of the affiant, sufficient effects whereof to satisfy the debt, &c. The bond for the attachment, is of the same date with that process, and is approved b.y “Wm. H. Cunningham, clerk.”
Read the full summary
Weit of error to the Circuit Court of Randolph county. Assumpsit on two promissory notes. The suit was commenced by attachment. The affidavit was made by an agent, who swears that the defendant is a non-resident, and that he has not within the State of his residence, within the knowledge of the affiant, sufficient effects whereof to satisfy the debt, &c. The bond for the attachment, is of the same date with that process, and is approved b.y “Wm. H. Cunningham, clerk.” The defendant pleaded two pleas In abatement. The first craves oyer of the attachment and affidavit, and then asserts, that on…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
1. The pleas in this case show, that the attachment was sued out under the 9th section of the act of 1833. That extends the benefits of the general attachment law, to non-resident creditors, but provides also, that such “shall give good and sufficient security, residing within the State, to be approved of by the judge of the county court, where the property or effects may be, or by any judge or clerk of the circuit court, for the amount, and with the like condition as required in other cases; and that in addition to the oath now required by law, such non-resident plaintiff, his agent or…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ellison v. MountsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1847
- Ross, Keen & Co. v. SteenSupreme Court of Florida · 1884
- Jessie v. SpurlinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1971