Van Winkle v. A. J. Stevens & Co.

9 Iowa 264
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedOctober 13, 1859
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 9 Iowa 264 (Van Winkle v. A. J. Stevens & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Van Winkle v. A. J. Stevens & Co., 9 Iowa 264 (iowa 1859).

Opinion

WRIGHT, C. J.

Where the petition which contained a Statement of the plaintiff’s cause of action, asked an attach[265]*265ment for a sufficient cause, and was properly verified, and where a writ of the attachment was issued in the case several áays afterwards. Held, that it was properly issued, and that it was not necessary for plaintiff to file another petition asldng for such a writ.

Held, also, that the provision of the Code, section 1847, requiring a separate petition, applies to cases where the attachment is sought after the commencement of the action, and not where it is asked at the time of its commencement.

The bond first filed was not in a sufficient amount, being in double the sum sworn to by plaintiff, instead of double the value of the property sought to be attached. Churchill v. Fulliam, 8 Iowa 45; Hamill, Ralston & Co. v. Phœnice, infra. After objection was made to it upon this ground, a new bond was filed cqring the defect. Held, that the force of the objection was thus obviated, and the motion was properly overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Fletcher & Son v. Gordon
259 N.W. 204 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1935)
Tilton v. Cofield
93 U.S. 163 (Supreme Court, 1876)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Iowa 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-winkle-v-a-j-stevens-co-iowa-1859.