Hellman v. Fowler
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Error to PulasTci Oireuit Court. Hon. Liberty Bartlett, Circuit Judge. The objection to the affidavit that it was made on the belief of the affiant, is settled by the case of Heard db Co. vs. Lowry, 5 Arle., 524-525. All that the statute requires in the affidavit is that the defendant is about to remove his goods, etc., not that they are being removed.
Read the full summary
Error to PulasTci Oireuit Court. Hon. Liberty Bartlett, Circuit Judge. The objection to the affidavit that it was made on the belief of the affiant, is settled by the case of Heard db Co. vs. Lowry, 5 Arle., 524-525. All that the statute requires in the affidavit is that the defendant is about to remove his goods, etc., not that they are being removed. The intention of the defendant to remove is sufficient for the issuance of the writ, and that intention, until the removal is commenced, cannot be absolutely and positively known — is a matter of belief only; and as the law gives a remedy that…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice ComptoN
This was a proceeding by attachment in the Pulaski circuit court. The declaration was filed in assumpsit, and the affidavit, on behalf of the plaintiffs, was as follows:
“ STATE OP ARKANSAS, ¡
OouNtt of Pulaski, j
I, Myer Harris, do solemnly swear that the defendants in the declaration hereto annexed, are justly indebted to the firm of J. & L. M. Heilman, plaintiffs in said declaration, in the sum of two thousand six hundred and five dollars and sixty-six cents; and that the said defendants, as I verily believe, are about to conceal and remove their goods and effects out of this state.
MYER…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Dyer v. FlintIllinois Supreme Court · 1859
- Archer v. ClaflinIllinois Supreme Court · 1863
- Sydnor v. TothamTexas Supreme Court · 1851
- Walker v. WelchIllinois Supreme Court · 1852
- Young v. Corder, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1837
3Cited by1 opinion
- Morgan v. Board of County CommissionersNevada Supreme Court · 1874