Case Name: Andrew Kennedy against Richard Baillie
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1800-09
Citations: 3 Yeates 55
Docket Number: 
Parties: Andrew Kennedy against Richard Baillie.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Yeates)
Volume: 3
Pages: 54–55

Head Matter:
Andrew Kennedy against Richard Baillie.
An unmarried man, who took lodgings in the city, rented a store and traded there, declaring his intentions of taking up a permanent residence, and residing there six months, who afterwards absconded, was declared an inhabitant under the domestic attachment law.
A foreign attachment issued in this court, returnable to the last March term; and afterwards a second foreign attachment at the suit of Potter, Page and Price in co. A domestic attachment afterwards issued to the same term, at the suit of George Dobson, founded on the solemn affirmation of Thomas Biddle. He declared that he was well acquainted with the defendant, Baillie, during his residence in Philadelphia; that he came there about the month of November 1799, as an unmarried man, took lodgings, and rented a store in the city, where he carried on trade; and that the said Baillie frequently declared to him his intention of taking up a permanent residence in the city, but had since absconded, &c.
On these facts, which were not disputed, Mr. John Ewing of counsel with Dobson, moved the court to quash the foreign attachments, and cited Lazarus Barnet’s case. 1 Dali. 152.
Mr. Sergeant for the plaintiff,
insisted that the defendant could not be deemed an inhabitant, within the attachment law, not having resided twelve months within the state, agreeably to the opinion delivered in Taylor and Finlayson v. Knox et al. 1 Dali. 159.

Opinion:
Shippen, C. J.
In the cases cited by the plaintiff's counsel, the court cautiously avoided laying down ány general rules, as to what will, or will not make a person an inhabitant, within the attachment law. They merely glanced at an idea, which appeared reasonable, under the then existing laws and constitution ; though they also say, the want of one year's residence in *such cases, will always have considerable weight with *56] them. A circumstance existed in the instance of David Knox, which differs it greatly from the present. Pie had another partner in England, of the name of Cowan, who resided there, kept store and traded. His supposed misconduct, as was sworn, led Knox to sail for England. It appears to us under the whole circumstances disclosed, that the present case is a more proper object of the domestic attachment law, and that the effects of Baillie should be divided rateably, amongst all his creditors ; and therefore dissolve the foreign attachments which have been issued.