¶1The bond, including the interlineation, is not framed as required by the statutes to dissolve the attachment ; it does not appear to have been accepted by the plaintiffs as a dissolution of the attachment; and it is in terms inconsistent with such dissolution, because it expressly makes the liability of the obligors to depend upon the question whether any property has been attached in the hands of the -trustee. The plaintiffs, having declared upon the bond in this form, has no ground of exception. Exceptions overruled.
121 Mass. 549
Caldwell v. Healey
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 10, 1877
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1877-01-10
Contract on a bond executed by the defendants, and alleged to contain the following condition: “ The condition of this obligation is such, that whereas said Phillip Caldwell & Co. have caused the goods and estate of said James Healey, in the hands and possession of the Merrimack Manufacturing Company, in Lowell, to the value of one hundred dollars, to be attached on mesne process, in a civil action, by virtue of a writ bearing date the tenth day of October, A. D. 1874, and…
Decided 1877-01-10