Case No. 3,603.

DAVIDSON v. DONOVAN et al.

[4 Cranch, C. C. 578.]¹

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

March Term, 1835.

ATTACHMENT—SERVICE OF NOTICE TO CORPORATION.

An attachment of credits in the hands of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company is sufficiently served by notice to the clerk of the company.

Mr. Marbury, for garnishees, contended that the service of the attachment by a notice to the clerk of the company was not sufficient, because he was not the proper officer to be summoned; and because not served in the presence of two witnesses. The attachment was also served upon W. Gunton, one of the directors. This was also objected to by Mr. Marbury, who contended that the service should have been upon the president of the company.

Mr. Woodward, the deputy-marshal, testified that he had been in the habit of always serving the process on the president and directors, until they directed him to serve process on their clerk, which they said would be sufficient.

THE COURT (nem. con.) was of opinion that the service of the attachment on the canal company, by giving the notice to Mr. Ingle, their clerk, as the officer, Mr. Woodward, was requested to do by the president and directors, was a sufficient service.

¹ [Reported by Hon. William Cranch, Chief Judge.]

This volume of American Law was transcribed for use on the Internet
Google.