Authors

Document Type

Judgment

Publication Date

9-30-1799

Article Footnote

Article 2, Footnote 162

Book Footnote

Chapter 6, footnote 34

Abstract

The plaintiff claimed that one of Sheriff Webster’s deputies had been ordered to make a pendente lite attachment and had filed a return detailing the goods seized. But when Perley was granted final judgment, the goods were nowhere to be found.

Included in

Legal History Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.