Bamberger, Bloom & Co. v. Merchants' & Farmers' Bank

Citations

• 73 Miss. 572

Syllabus

<p>Attachment. Removal from the state. Sttfficiency of evidence.</p> <p>A merchant is not rendered-liable to attachment on the ground that-he was about to “remove himself or his property out of this-state” by the facts that his business was not prosperous; that he was dissatisfied and desired to remove to another state; that, several months before the attachment, he had requested a witness, to look out for a suitable location for him in another state, and that he corresponded with friends in another state with a view to-removal, when it also appears that his contemplated removal was-altogether conditional, and that at the time of the attachment he was conducting his business in the usual way, and making no-preparations for the removal either of himself or his property.</p>