Case ID: binn_5/html/0389-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Kearney against M'Cullough.
    
      Philadephia, Saturday, January 9.
    Motion for rule to show cause why foreign attachment fhoSd not be dissolved, is in time at December term, if the attachment was returnable at July, that term buTon^dayf
    FOREIGN attachment to July term 1811. On the first day of December term following, jfallowed for the defendant obtained a rule upon the plaintiff to shew his cause of action, and why the attachment should not be dissolved,
    
      Meredith for the plaintiff, being now called upon to shew cause, contended that the motion was too late by the practice of the court. It should have been made at the term to which the writ was returnable. Serg. on Att. 138.
   Per Curiam.

The court in July, being held for one day only, for the purpose of receiving returns, has not generally been considered as a meeting of business. It is true the motion might then have been made. But we think the defendant cannot be said to have been in default, in not making the motion sooner than the December term following.

No cause being shewn,

Attachment dissolved.