Kern, Barr & Co. v. C. A. Wyatt & Co.

Citations

• 89 Va. 885
• 17 S.E. 549
• 1893 Va. LEXIS 117

Syllabus

<p>1. Attachment—Non-residents—Abatement.—Where, in attachment as against property of non-resident debtors, who had not been served with process, personally or by publicación, complainants consented to the hearing of a motion by claimant of the property to abate the attachment—</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>A decree abating the attachment, and declaring the estate not to belong to the said debtors, was not premature or erroneous.</p> <p>2. Chancery Practice—Replications—Depositions.—Where both parties have taken depositions, a decree will not be reversed on the ground that there was no replication to the answer.</p> <p>'3. Idem—Error of fact.—Error in deciding the ownership of attached property is one of fact, and can be corrected only by appeal, and not by bill of review.</p> <p>4. Idem—Retention of cause.—Where, in such case as the above, the court abated the attachment because the property was not owned by the non-resident firm, the decree ends the cause, which will not be retained to inquire whether one of said firm had an attachable interest in the property.</p> <p>5. Bill or Review—Newly-discovered evidence.—A bill of review must be supported by affidavit that the evidence is not only new, but could not have been obtained by reasonable diligence before the hearing; and the complainant must file the affidavit of the witness to the newly-discovered evidence, and not merely his own.</p> <p>6. Idem—Impeachment of witnesses.—Such evidence, merely confirming facts already proved, or tending merely to discredit witnesses already examined, is no ground for bill of review.</p>