Root v. Railroad Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the Circuit Court of Hocking County. The litigation in the case below arose out of a controversy between certain creditors of an insolvent corporation, the Hocking Iron Company. The plaintiff, under an execution issued upon a judgment in its favor, had levied upon certain property of the insolvent company. Executions of other creditors, the first being that of The Austin Powder Co., had previously been levied upon the same property.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Hocking County. The litigation in the case below arose out of a controversy between certain creditors of an insolvent corporation, the Hocking Iron Company. The plaintiff, under an execution issued upon a judgment in its favor, had levied upon certain property of the insolvent company. Executions of other creditors, the first being that of The Austin Powder Co., had previously been levied upon the same property. But, prior to any of these levies, the plaintiff in error Charles Root & Co., claimed to have acquired a lien upon the same property by proceedings in…
1Opinion of the CourtMinshall, J.
In order to effect an attachment of personal property, it must be taken into the custody of the officer serving the writ; until this is done, no attachment can be said to exist. It need not in all cases be actual, but must in every case be such custody as the nature of the subject attached will admit of. Such is not only the positive requirement of our statute (sec. 5528, Rev. Stats.), but is in accordance with the statement of the law upon the subject as found in the treatises and decided cases. 1 Wade on Attachment, sec. 129; Drake on Attachment, sec, 292a; Waples on Attachment, 175;…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bohart v. AtkinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1846
- Brush v. SeguinIllinois Supreme Court · 1860
- Gates v. FlintMississippi Supreme Court · 1860
- Biscoe v. SandefurSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1854
- Minor v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1861
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.