J. Pollock & Co. v. George R. Murray & Co.

Citations

• 38 Fla. 105

Syllabus

<p>1. An affidavit and bond in attachment were filed and a writ of attachment issued and levied upon property; five days thereafter a praecipe for summons in an ordinary action of assumpsit, without reference to the attachment proceedings, was filed, and subsequently a declaration in assumpsit, with a bill of particulars, was filed. A plea in abatement of the alleged second suit on the ground that two suits had been instituted on the same cause of action was interposed and issue joined thereon. Upon the trial the plea in abatement was sustained, but by permission the declaration, with bill of particulars, was instantly filed in what was considered the first suit, and pleas filed thereto: Decided, That whether or not the ruling of the court in sustaining the plea was erroneous was of no practical importance in the case, as plaintiffs still had the benefit o the declaration filed in what was regarded the first case.</p> <p>3. A power of attorney under seal was required under the attachment laws of this State prior to the adoption of the Revised Statutes to authorize an agent to execute a bond in the name of the principal, but a full ratification under seal by the principal of an attachment bond executed by an agent without such authority will be sufficient.</p> <p>3. A defendant has the right up to the trial of the case upon its merits to traverse the allegations in plaintiff’s affidavit for attachment, and this right is available as well after as before plea to the action.</p>