Case ID: iowa_11/html/0432-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Baldwin, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. L. Langworthy & Bro. v. Waters, Hughes & Co.
    1. Attachment: practice. The Supreme Court will not reverse an or-l der of the District Court overruling a motion to disolve an attachment, on the ground that the allegations of the affidavit were insufficient, . when it appears that prior to such ruling an amended petition was filed which is not embraced in the record brought to this court.
    2. Attachment: amendment. An affidavit for an attachment may be amended in substance as well as in form.
    
      Appeal from Duhuqne District Court.
    
    Thursday, April 11.
    
      Wilson, TJtley Doud for the appellant.
    No appearance for the appellee.
   Baldwin, J.

The defendants appeals from the judgment of the District Court overruling a motion to dissolve ah attachment claimed to have been issued in said cause. The record shows that an amended petition was filed prior to the. ruling of the court upon the motion to dissolve. The defective affidavit may have been cured by the amended petition. A defective affidavit may be amended in substance as well as in form. Bunn v. Pritchard, 6 Iowa 56. Neither the writ of attachment nor the amended petition is made part of the record of the case. Without them, we are unable to say that the court below erred in its rulings.

Judgment affirmed.