Taylor v. Gardner
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
This was a scire facias against the garnishee, upon an attachment and judgment against Lees. The question of law arose up,on the following facts: The attachment was laid on the 14th of September, 1807. In answer to the interrogatories put to the defendant, under the act of assembly, he stated, that on the 19th of September, 1807, he received fifty crates of earthenware, belonging to William Lees, which netted nine hundred dollars; but that William Lees was under acceptances…
Read the full summary
This was a scire facias against the garnishee, upon an attachment and judgment against Lees. The question of law arose up,on the following facts: The attachment was laid on the 14th of September, 1807. In answer to the interrogatories put to the defendant, under the act of assembly, he stated, that on the 19th of September, 1807, he received fifty crates of earthenware, belonging to William Lees, which netted nine hundred dollars; but that William Lees was under acceptances of certain bills endorsed, by the defendant, which the defendant had been obliged to pay, the bills having been…
1Opinion of the CourtWashington, Circuit Justice
(charging: jury). This is a hard case upon the defendant, who at the. time this attachment was levied, was liable to pay these bills, as endorser, to a much greater amount than the value of the funds of Lees in his hands, and if he had then paid them, he most undoubtedly would not have had in his hands any effects of Lees, as he could not have been liable for more than the balance of account, between him and Lees But until he paid them, he was not a creditor of Lees; and ot course, the attachment bound the effects of Lees in his hands, at the time it was laid,, which could not be affected by…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McLaughlin v. SwannSupreme Court of the United States · 1856