Schwabacher Bros. v. Abrahams Grocery Co.

44 P. 257, 14 Wash. 225, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 343
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 9, 1896
DocketNo. 2059
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 44 P. 257 (Schwabacher Bros. v. Abrahams Grocery Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Schwabacher Bros. v. Abrahams Grocery Co., 44 P. 257, 14 Wash. 225, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 343 (Wash. 1896).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This appeal is from an order of the superior court of King county, refusing to dissolve an attachment.

(1). Appellant’s first contention is that the attachment issued before the action was commenced by the service of summons. It was not issued, however, until after the filing of’ the complaint. The objection, therefore, is not well taken. Cosh-Murray Co. v. Tuttich, 10 Wash. 449 (38 Pac. 1134).

(2). It is next urged that the allegations for the attachment were untrue. These allegations are, “ that said defendant has assigned secreted and disposed, and is about to assign, secrete and dispose of its property, with intent to delay and defraud its creditors, and has converted a part of its property into money for the purpose of placing it beyond the reach of its creditors.” The motion to dissolve was based upon affidavits, and the respondent in turn filed affidavits supporting the attachment. We have carefully examined all of the affidavits so submitted, a detailed [226]*226reference to which is deemed neither useful nor necessary, and conclude that sufficient was shown to justify the attachment and the order which was made sustaining it.

(3). We are unable to discover from the record that the appellant corporation is insolvent, and no allegation to that effect is contained in the affidavit upon which the writ issued. It therefore becomes unimportant to determine whether an attachment may be had in this state against the property of an insolvent corporation.

The order appealed from is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Compton v. Schwabacher Bros. & Co.
46 P. 338 (Washington Supreme Court, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 P. 257, 14 Wash. 225, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwabacher-bros-v-abrahams-grocery-co-wash-1896.