Yale v. Hoopes

The plaintiffs upon a money demand against Hoopes, a nonresident, attached certain merchandize, and brought suit praying for judgment against him, with the right of selling the property attached to pay their claim by preference.

Seaman, Pecio & Go. intervened, and, alleging that they had sold the merchandize attached to the defendant on a credit, he having promised to furnish them collateral security, which he had failed to do, they prayed: 1st, that the sale from them to Hoopesha avoided, and the goods restored to them; and, 2d, that they be decreed to have the first privilege on the goods as…