Carpenter v. Pridgen
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Houston. Tried below before the Hon. L. W. Cooper. Pridgen brought suit on an account for merchandise 'by attachment. Green Carpenter and his mother, Lavinia Carpenter, the defendants, moved to quash the attachment; pleaded -general denial, minority of defendant, Green Carpenter, and that the property levied on by attachment was not subject to execution. The motion to quash was overruled, judgment was rendered for plaintiff, and the defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Moore, Associate Justice.
So much of the affidavit upon which the attachment in this case issued to which it is necessary to refer reads as follows: “The said defendants, Green and Lavinia Carpenter, are about to transfer their property, or dispose of the same, for the purpose of defrauding their creditors, and that thereby affiant will probably lose his debt.” The act or acts indicating the fraudulent purpose of the appellant, by reason whereof the appellee might probably lose his debt, is alleged disjunctively to be the transferring or the disposing of their property. And unless it can be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Culbertson v. CabeenTexas Supreme Court · 1867
- Garner v. BurlesonTexas Supreme Court · 1862
- Hopkins v. NicholsTexas Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by7 opinions
- C. M. Pearre & Co. v. HawkinsTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Dunnenbaum & Friedlander v. Schram & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1883
- Blum v. DavisTexas Supreme Court · 1882
- Parsons v. KeysTexas Supreme Court · 1875
- Padley v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.