Bancord v. Parker
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Franlclin county: No. 39, to May Term 1870. On the 13th of September 1856, Henry, Sites issued an attachment execution on a judgment for $800 in his favor against Jacob Bancord. The sheriff was directed to levy the attachment on debts, &c., in the hands of E. Emerson and others. The sheriff returned that he had served the writ on the garnishees. It did not appear that the defendant had been served.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Franlclin county: No. 39, to May Term 1870. On the 13th of September 1856, Henry, Sites issued an attachment execution on a judgment for $800 in his favor against Jacob Bancord. The sheriff was directed to levy the attachment on debts, &c., in the hands of E. Emerson and others. The sheriff returned that he had served the writ on the garnishees. It did not appear that the defendant had been served. Bancord was one of the heirs of Jacob Bancord, Sr., deceased. By his will he directed his land to be sold, subject to a life interest for his widow, which was…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, May 19th 1870, by
Agnew, J.
This case is ruled by Strouse’s Ex’rs. v. Becker, 8 Wright 206, Zimmerman v. Briner, 14 Id. 535, and Bair v. Stein-man, 2 P. F. Smith 423, on the ground that the election to retain the debt attached came too late after the jury was sworn upon the issue of nulla hona entered forty days before the trial. Those were cases of attachment in execution, and therefore directly in point. To them we may add Hammer v. Freese, 7 Harris 255, and Rogers v. Waterman, 1 Casey 182, on the necessity of diligence on part of the defendant in…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Finberg v. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Hild Floor MacHine Co. v. RudolphSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Finberg v. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Finberg v. SullivanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980