Clark v. . Quinn

27 N.C. 175

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: December 5, 1844
• Status: Published

Opinion

Daniel, J.

We concur with his Honor in opinion ; all and each of the said six attachments, under which the plaintiff claimed title to the property in dispute, were void. Neither of the attachments was returnable at any particular day, nor within thirty days after the issuing of them, nor were they, or either of them, returnable within thirty days from their teste. The act of Assembly requires that such attachment, returnable before Justices of the Peace, should be made returnable before the Justice issuing it, or some other Justice, on, oí before thirty days from the date thereof, to be proceeded in, &c. Rev. St. ch. 6, s. 13,17. In the case of Washington v. Saunders (2 Dev. Rep. 343) this court decided, that original process, (which these attachments are) without any certain day mentioned in it, to which it is returnable, is void; Ibid, 346. The plaintiff) therefore, had no right or title to the property as against Trice. The property of Trice, thus being in the possession of the plaintiff, was nevertheless subject to Patton’s execution.

Per Curiam, Judgment affirmed.