Albuquerque daily citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1895-1903, 1898-10-31
PECULIAR CASE DEcIDID.
Supreme Courts Holding on Suits In
Attachment.

defendants In error, error 70 the dis
trict court OF socorro county, Chief JUS
tice Mills handed down an opinion,
which was eoncurred in by the other
members Of the court, affirming the
judgment OF the lower court.
On January 20, 1894, the plaintiff. as
receiver OF the Albuquerque National
ba k. fled In the district court for so.
zorro county. a declaration in assumpslt,
and on the 6Ih Of the following March
filed an affidavit Tor attachment, claim
log that the defendants owed the bank
Of which he was receiver. a certain SUN
of money on three promlssOry notes.
The grounds for the attachment. as set
out in the affidavit, we're that the Ameri-
can Valley Company "has irsudulently
concealed and disposed OF property aud
effects 30 as to defraud. hinder and de-
lay Its creditors and that the said Amerl-
al Valley Company is about 10 remove
It's property aud effects out OF the terri.
tory, and that the said defendant, the
American Valley Company is about 10
fraudulently convey and assign, conceal
and dispose Of its property aud effects 80
a. to hinder, delay and defraud it, credi.
tors; and that the said defendant W. b
Slaughter Is not a resident OF and does
not reside within ths territory OF New
Mexico" On the sAme day bond was
hled aud summons aud writ OF attach
ment were issued, aud were placed In
the hands OF the sheriff Of SOcorro county
for service. Under the writ Of attach.
ment the sheriff levied on the property
OF the American Valley Company aud
took Il into his possession.
The defendant company aud Slaughter
entered separate appearances and duly
pleaded TO the suit In assumpsit, and
both trayersed the AFFIDAVIT Of attach.
ment. On May %. 1894, on motion, the
court granted severance, and trial was
had on the truth Of the affidavit. aud the
traverse to II 6led by the American Val
ley company, a jury being impaneled.
nv Nl0 NNnNAuNiNh VI AhN NNihfhNo NuHlNu
by the plaintiff the defendant moved the
court to instruct the jury 10 dnd the
issue In its favor, and the jury, by the
direction Of the court, 80 found. To this
instruction the plaintiff duly excepted.
and moved the court TO set aside the YER
dict, which motion was oyerruled, and
judgment dissOlving the attachment and
taxing the costs against SchO6eld as 70.
ceiyer. was duly entered.
On January 8. 1898 (nearly four years
after the trial Of the issue raised by the
attachmentl. the plaintiff gave notice In
the assumpsit suit, on which the attach
ment was based, that he would mot fur
Their prosecute this cause, and moves TO
dismiss the same" The court accord
ingly dismissed the case, and ordered
costs to DO taxed against the plaintiff,
and on the Goth OF the same month the
following order was entered: Now
come the parties In this cause. and by
their attorneys, aud 6le their stipulation
herein, whereby Il is agreed that the
record In this case shall show the
fact that after the trial Of the truth OF
the attachment affidavit herein. and
before the dismissal OF the cause. the
case was compromised and settled by the
payment to the plaintiff OF a portion OF
the money claimed, which was received
as full payment OF the claim Of the
plaintiff; and that said stipulation shall
be taken a a part OF the record in said
cause, or that the record OF the said
cause may DO amended In accordance
with the said stipulation 80 a. to show
the above mentioned facts" Bill OF OK
ceptiOns wa thereafter settled and that
part Of the case which related TO the writ
OF attachment came before the supreme
court.
The case was a peculiar one aud wa
given careful consideration by the court
The plaintiff seemed 10 think that an
appel should be taken from a judgment
dissOlying an attachment, and cited au
thOrities In support OF his contention
The court, however. arrived at the con
%clusion that the plaintiff, having dis
missed the main action, that the attach
msnt went down with the dismissal; ais,
that the record showed that the writ o.
error was not sued out until more thar
two years later than the law allowed sucl
writ to be taken. The court therefore
held that:
When an affidavit In attachment Il
trayersed and trial is had On the issuei
raised, an appeal cannot be taken from
the judgment until hnal judgment Ia en-
tered In the main case 10 which the at
tachment Is auxiliary,
After judgment Is entered for the de
PENDANT on the trial OF the issues raised
on the trayerse OF an affidavit for attach.
ment, no appeal can be taken from suct
judgment when the plaintiff afterwards
voluntarily dismisses the main case L
which the writ OF attachment is aux.
Hilary,
The Ancient Order Of United Work
men and the Independent Order Of Ode
Fellows, at a joint meeting Of commit
tees the other evening, concluded TO Civ
a benefit grand ball for A. D. johnson
who recently lost an arm in an aeciden
while at work at the local railway yards
The hall will be- held al ATmOfy hall OF