Case Name: John Steinmetz against William Hammond, Garnishee of De Drusina, Ridder & Clerke
Court: General Court of Maryland
Jurisdiction: Maryland
Decision Date: 1789-10
Citations: 2 Md. 399
Docket Number: 
Parties: John Steinmetz against William Hammond, Garnishee of De Drusina, Ridder &, Clerke.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maryland reports, being a series of the most important law cases argued and determined in the Provincial Court and Court of Appeals of the then province of Maryland, from the year 1700 [i.e. 1658] down to the [end of 1799]
Volume: 2
Pages: 399–399

Head Matter:
GENERAL COURT,
OCTOBER TERM, 1789.
John Steinmetz against William Hammond, Garnishee of De Drusina, Ridder &, Clerke.
IT appears that on the 22d of May, 1788, a writ of at«• htckmcnt founded upon a j udgment on two non sunts issued, directed to the Sheriff of Prince George’s County, in the usual form, and that the said attachment was laid in the hands of Robert Toung, attorney in fact; that the said Toung appeared and pleaded several pleas. But afterwards at this term, the said Toung withdrew his pleas and confessed effects in his hands to the sum of 471/. 5s. 7d. current money and judgment of condemnation thereupon entered, &c.
R. Ridgely, for appellant.
J), M‘Mechen, for appellee.

Opinion:
At this term, without being warned to appear, the defendant, William, Hammond, of Baltimore County, voluntarily came into Court by his attorney, (by and with the consent of the plaintiff,) and confessed effects of the said De Drusina, &c. in his hands, to the amount of 400/. current money, and judgment of condemnation was thereupon entered against him, &c.
Afterwards, on the 29th of October, 1792, the defendant brought a writ of error, and the judgment of the General Court was reversed in the Court of Appeals at June term. 1794.