Legal Opinion

Dorr v. Waldron

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1871PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from the Superior Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Breese

This was an attachment under the act of 1845, brought to the Superior Court of Chicago at the June term, 1870.

The proceedings were regular under the statute, by affidavit, bond, statement of the cause of action, and bill of particulars, on which a writ of attachment issued, and was levied on the tug boat in question, “ E. P. Dorr,” and by reading the writ “to Joseph Moffett, owner of said tug boat.”

The boat appeared by attorney and pleaded nil debit, and a special plea as follows :

And for a further plea in this behalf, the defendant says, actio non, because it says, true it is that plaintiffs…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lyman v. President of the Bank of the United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
  2. Williamson v. HoganIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Germain v. Steam Tug IndianaIllinois Supreme Court · 1850
  4. Tug Montauk v. William H. Walker & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1868

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Gindele v. CorriganIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Benbow v. James JohnsOregon Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Ransberry v. North American Transportation & Trading Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Honore v. WilshireIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Barruel v. IrwinNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1882

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API