Ross v. Clarke
This text of 1 U.S. 354 (Ross v. Clarke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The money is to be considered in the same state, as if it had been paid into the hands of the sheriff. If a proceeding of this kind were allowed, there could be no end to suits. We are unanimously of opinion, that the foreign attachment has issued irregularly, and ought to be quashed.
The rule made absolute,
In McCarty v. Emlen, 2 Yeates 190, s. c. Dall. 277, it was held, that a debt in suit might be attached in the hands of the defendant in the suit. C. J. McKean, however, in the course of his opinion, recognised the case in the text, as one in which an attachment would not lie.1
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 U.S. 354, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-clarke-pa-1788.