Vollmer v. Spencer
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Latah County. The court below having dissolved an entire attachment where two separate and distinct causes of attachment are separately and distinctly stated in the affidavit therefor, upon the traverse of one only committed a palpable error. (Drake an Attachment, sec. 101.) And if the defendant leaves one of the causes uncontested, it will sustain the attachment though all the others be nutrue.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Latah County. The court below having dissolved an entire attachment where two separate and distinct causes of attachment are separately and distinctly stated in the affidavit therefor, upon the traverse of one only committed a palpable error. (Drake an Attachment, sec. 101.) And if the defendant leaves one of the causes uncontested, it will sustain the attachment though all the others be nutrue. (1 Wade on Attachments, p. 136, sec. 64; Keith v. Stetter, 25 Kan. *100.) The case at bar is stronger than the Kansas case. There, there were three grounds for one of the…
1Opinion
SULLIVAN, C. J.,
Dissenting. — I cannot concur in the conclusion reached by my associates. Section 4302 of the Revised Statutes, is as follows: “The plaintiff, at the time of issuing the summons, or at any time afterward, may have the property of the defendant attached, as security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be recovered, unless the defendant give security to pay such judgment, as in this chapter provided, in the following cases: 1. In an action, upon a judgment, or upon contract, express or implied, for the direct payment of money, where the contract is not secured by any…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hathaway v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Murphy v. MontandonIdaho Supreme Court · 1892
- Fisk v. FrenchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Willman v. FriedmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1893
- Simmons Hardware Co. v. Alturas Commercial Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1895