Laborde v. Ubarri
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED ‘ STATES FOR PORTO RICO. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holmes
This is the same suit that has been decided already. Ubarri v. Laborde, ante, p. 168. There is presented here a subordinate question as to the right of the plaintiffs in error, who were also the plaintiffs below, to retain an attachment against property alleged to belong to two non-resident heirs of Pablo Ubarri. The District Court ordered the complaint to be dismissed as to these, heirs and the attachment against any of their property to be dissolved, on the principle that has been laid down more than once by this court, that in the courts of the United States “attachment is but an incident…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Toland v. SpragueSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Clark v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Ex Parte Railway CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Chaffee v. HaywardSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
3Cited by16 opinions
- Big Vein Coal Co. of W. Va. v. ReadSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Davis v. Ensign-Bickford Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1944
- State Ex Rel. St. Louis, Brownsville & Mexico Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1923
- Allen v. ClarkDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1938
- Hisel v. Chrysler CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1950
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.