Case Name: Weems and others v. John and Richard Jennings
Court: Constitutional Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1806-11
Citations: 2 Brev. 92
Docket Number: 
Parties: Weems and others v. John and Richard Jennings.
Judges: All the judges, except Bay, J., present.
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 92–92

Head Matter:
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, COLUMBIA,
NOV., 1806.
Weems and others v. John and Richard Jennings.
At any time within a year, the plaintiff in attachment may apply for a rule to plead, if he file his declaration in good time ; and if the absent debtor has obtained judgments against third persons, who have been summoned as garnishees, the court will, on motion, order execution to be stayed against the garnishees, and the payment to abide the issue of the suit, by attachment.
All the judges, except Bay, J., present.
Foreign attachment. The declaration was filed 31st March, 1806. James Laney and others were summoned as garnishees. The absent debtor had obtained judgments against the said garnishees, and execution was about to issue, when a motion was made in Abbeville District Court, before Grimke, J., to stay the execution, and stop the money recovered on the said judgments, in the hands of the garnishees, to satisfy the debt to be recovered of the absent debtor in the attachment.
Grevike, J., refused the motion on the gvound, that although the declaration in attachment liad been duly filed according to-the attachment law, yet, as no rule to plead had issued directly after the filing of the declaration, the plaintiff, he thought, had forfeited his right to proceed, ana that it was loo late to cure the neglect by publishing notice to plead.
On motion in this court, to reverse the aforesaid decision, Bowie stated, that he had obtained the rule to plead soon after filing the declaration, but had, through mistake, neglected to publish the same ; but as a year had not elapsed since filing the declaration, he hoped it was not yet too late to publish a rule to plead.

Opinion:
Trezevant, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court. The suit is still pending, the plaintiff not having neglected to proceed for the space of a year and a day. The attachment act is silent as to the time of giving notice to plead, after filing the declaration, therefore, the plaintiff ought to be allowed to take out a rule to plead, and publish the same, within the intent of the act. The motion to stay the monies in the hands of the garnishees was reasonable, and ought to have been granted.
Motion granted.