Broeck v. Pendleton
This text of 23 F. Cas. 839 (Broeck v. Pendleton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The CouRT
contra:,) was of opinion, that the attachment should be quashed.
Mr. Bradley then moved to amend the short note, by stating the instrument to be under seal, and to declare in debt. There is no bail to be injured by the amendment. The property of the debtor, himself, is attached. The motion to quash is made really by the defendant, through the garnishee.
The Court refused leave to amend by changing the action from case to debt, because the short note of the cause of action would not have given the defendant the notice which the act contemplates.
The attachment was quashed, because it was to compel the defendant to answer in an action of trespass on the case, when the cause of action was in debt upon a sealed instrument.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
23 F. Cas. 839, 5 D.C. 464, 5 Cranch 464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/broeck-v-pendleton-circtddc-1838.