Case ID: us_2/html/0079-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Shippen, President:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Miltenberger versus Lloyd.
    A FOREIGN attachment issued against the defendant, returnable to the June term 1790, and in the vacation after September Term, special bail was entered. At the present adjourned Court, Hallowed moved for a rule to shew cause, why the defendant should not be discharged on common bail.
   But

Shippen, President:

—The obvious hardship of tying up property by foreign attachments, induced us to investigate the cause of action, and to dissolve the attachments, if under the same circumstances, in the case of a Capias, common bail would be ordered. This authority must, however, be exercised by the Court; and, therefore, such cases are always refered thither by a single Judge. But even the Court will not exercise it, unless the application is made at the first term: And, consequently, the present motion is much too late.