City National Bank v. Flippen

Citations

• 66 Tex. 610
• 1 S.W. 897
• 1886 Tex. LEXIS 579

Syllabus

<p>1. Affidavit for. attachment—Defect—Construction—An affidavit for attachment omitted the word “ is ” before the words “justly indebted,” reading, “ the defendant, F., justly indebted to the plaintiff,” etc. Held:</p> <p>(1) The language had no meaning, it made no charge against the defendant, and the affidavit was fatally defective.</p> <p>(2) Ho presumption could he indulged to supply a defect, which, if not supplied, would prevent the affidavit from coming up to the requirements of the statute.</p> <p>(3) The utmost latitude allowed is to exact only a substantial compliance with the law. The language in the affidavit must be looked to, and nothing of importance can be added to it upon the assumption that the affiant intended, but neglected to make the addition. (Evans v. Tucker, 59 Tex., 249.)</p>