Case ID: blackf_1/html/0025-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Blackford, J. \n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hamilton and Another v. Knight.
    If an affidavit against two joint debtors be insufficient as to one of them, it will not authorize an attachment against the property of both.
    ERROR to the Franklin Circuit Court. — An attachment issued in this case against the property of James Hamilton and Miihael Jones, upon an affidavit, which merely stated, as to the former, that he was a sojourner of the county in which the writ was sued out, and that the ordinary process of law could not bé served on him. The Court below, to which the attachment was returned, at their May term, 1814, under the territorial government, rendered judgment by default against both the defendants, and the property of both, which had been attached, was ordered to be sold.
   Blackford, J.

This affidavit is defective as to one of the defendants below, in not showing that he was privately removing, or about to remove from the county. Ind. Terr. Stat. 1811, p. 46. And as the attachment is against the property of both, and the judgment against them both, the proceedings are erroneous .

Lane, for the plaintiffs.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is reversed, with costs* 
      
       If a joint judgment against two, be erroneous as to one, it must be té. versed as to both. Battle v. Coleman, 6 Wheat. 475.