Case ID: scl_14/html/0338-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Colcock, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ohors vs. Hill, Lawton vs. Same.
    Books of accounts are not liable to Domestic attachments, so as to create a lien on the debts due the absconding debtor, asin foreign attachments.
    This was amotion made.before Judge Bay in Charleston, by Mr. Pepoon, attorney for the first attaching creditor, Ohors, to have the books of accounts belonging to the absent debtor delivered over to him, claiming the first lien, on the rights and credits of the said absent debtor. This motion was opposed by Mr. Clarke, attorney for several subsequent attaching creditors, on the ground, that they had first served copies of their attachrhents on sundry debtors, and on the books' of the absent debtor, which he contended gave them a- prior right to the sums due on the books; and that they had a preferable claim, to-the books. Bay J. before whom the motion was made, was of opinion, that the first attaching creditor -had a prior Hen on the bonks of accounts of the absent debtor; as it was the lodging of the first attachment in the sheriffs office, that gave the prior lien, and not the first serv*■ ing of a copy of the attachment on a garnishee, and ruled that the books of accounts should be deposited with the clerk of the court, .till the first attaching creditor should file his declaration, and then to be delivered to him; and after satisfying the first attaching creditor, then to be delivered over to the subsequent attaching creditor. He refered to Callahan vs. Hallowell, 2 Bay, 8, and Stephen vs. Thayer, 2 Bay 212.
   Colcock, J.

The mode of proceeding by attachment is a peculiar one, and we are, therefore, to examine the act for our direction in every particular. There is no authority in any of the acts relating to domestic attachments to levy opt books of accounts, so as to create a lien on the debts which appear by them to be due the absconding debtor. It is observed, that by the foreign attachment act, they are expressly mentioned, and authority is given to the attaching creditor to sue for and recover the debts, to give receipts, &c. none of which provisions are made in the acts which relate to domestic attachments, and which are indispensably necessary to effect the purpose of attaching the debts by attaching the books. The purposes of the law also'shew that they were not in the contemplation of the legislature; for the acts are intended to stop such moveables as an absconding debtor would be likely to carry away; and, therefore, the words used in the acts, “negroes, goods, chattels and effects;” all of which may be attached. It is then only necessary to consider, whether the creditor, who summoned the persons indebted to the absent debtor, shall receive the debts so due to him. And in the case before us there can be no doubt on that subject. ■ The attachment of the Lawtons was levied in the hands of these persons and they were summoned as garnishees, and have made their returns. These debts are then to be condemned in their hands, for the particular benefit of the creditor who calls them into court as garnishees. ■ This point was decided in the much contested case of the famous ■ George Forrest, who so mysteriously departed from this state in 1811.

Clarice for the motion.

i contra.

The motion is granted.