Roig v. Tim
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas N o. 4, of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1883, No. 206. Attachment execution, by David Tim against P. II. Ertheilcr, defendant, and Antonio Eoig, garnishee.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas N o. 4, of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1883, No. 206. Attachment execution, by David Tim against P. II. Ertheilcr, defendant, and Antonio Eoig, garnishee. On the trial, before Briggs, J., the following facts appeared: The judgment on which the attachment issued was originally entered by confession, against P. H. Ertheiler in favor of David Tim, on a single bill under seal, with warrant of attorney, for $6,000 on June 26th 1880. On the same day an attachment execution wras issued and served on Antonio Eoig, garnishee. On July 1st 1880, the court…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court wras filed
Pek Curiam.
The service of an attachment execution has the effect of an equitable assignment of the thing attached. It puts the garnishee in the relation to the attaching creditor which he had sustained to his former creditor. He may make the same defense to the attachment by evidence of set-off or of other equities that he might have made if sued by his original creditor. If he has no defence against the latter,' he cannot set *118up one against tlie attaching creditor. A valid set-off must be of a debt or demand due at the time of the commencement of the action…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Aarons v. Pub. Ser. B. L. Assn.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Aarons v. Public Service Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Almi, Inc. v. Dick Corp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Frazier v. BergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Pocono Spring Water Ice Co. v. American Ice Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.