Rouss v. Gilliam

Citations

• 70 Pa. Super. 594
• 1919 Pa. Super. LEXIS 16

Syllabus

<p>Attachment under Act of 1869 — Appeals—Interlocutory order— Dissolution of attachment — Certiorari—Acts of March 17, 1869, P. L. 9, and May U, 1887, P. L. 197.</p> <p>An order of the court dissolving or refusing to dissolve, an attachment under the Act of March 17, 1869, P. L. 9, as amended by the Act of May 24, 1887, P. L. 197, is interlocutory from which an appeal will not lie. Even if such appeal could be entertained it would merely be in the nature of a certiorari, and the examination of the appellate court would be limited solely to the regularity of the proceeding as shown by the record.</p> <p>If from the opinion filed it might appear that the court below proceeded upon an erroneous conception of the law as applied to the evidence, and in doing so abused the discretion lodged in it by the sixth section of. the Act of March 17, 1869, P. L. 9, the appellate court might consider the question of such abuse of discretion, if there is anything on the record to show that there was any such abuse.</p> <p>Where possession has been taken, by the sheriff, of a defendant’s goods in an attachment under the Act of March 17, 1869, P. L. 9, and its amendments, and the plaintiff does not file his statement of claim for more than a year after the attachment issued, the court does not abuse its discretion in dissolving the attachment because of the plaintiff’s laches in failing to vigorously prosecute the case.</p> <p>The writ cannot be used to oppress the defendant, and while the act directs that the proceeding should follow that of a summons for debt, it places it in the hands of the court to dissolve the attachment for cause shown.</p>