Childs & Co. v. Digby
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to tbe District Court of Allegheny county. This was a scire facias against William Digby, garnishee of Thomas Scandrett, in an action of foreign attachment, instituted in the District Court of Allegheny county, January Term, 1852, by the plaintiffs, H. Childs & Co., against the said Thomas Scand-rett, a non-resident of Pennsylvania.
Read the full summary
ERROR to tbe District Court of Allegheny county. This was a scire facias against William Digby, garnishee of Thomas Scandrett, in an action of foreign attachment, instituted in the District Court of Allegheny county, January Term, 1852, by the plaintiffs, H. Childs & Co., against the said Thomas Scand-rett, a non-resident of Pennsylvania. The writ of foreign attachment was issued on the 17th of December, 1851, and was executed by serving a copy thereof on William Digby, the defendant, on December 18, 1851, and summoning him as garnishee. On the 12th August, 1852, a judgment, in favor of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Lewis, J.
The observation of Mr. Justice Coultee in Christmas v. Biddle, 1 Harris 223, that “the attachment process is a proceeding in rem, and the matter and thing attached must be in the power and jurisdiction of the Court,” must be taken with some qualification. It is true, that “ the attachment process is a proceeding in rem;” but it is equally true that it is something more. It is also a proceeding against the garnishee personally, for the purpose of compelling him to answer for the value where the thing itself is not produced. The summons, the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wheat v. Platte City & Fort Desmoines R. R.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1868
- Wiener v. American Insurance Co. of BostonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909