HA.TB-IELDîtUMOLLEB. 117 �ition on such a ground is dneaddiresBed to the sound discre- tion of the court, and when it is made, as here, before the trial, the granting of the motion lùay be with leave tb issue a -new commission for re-examinatiou of the witnessea.
- Motion granted.
���Eatfield V. MoLLER and othera. {Circuit Court, D. New Jersey. November 30, 1880.> �L Banksûptct — Attachment. — 'Ah attachaient levied -witlii-i fou», months before the commencement bf proceedings in bankruptcy is dissolved, ipso facto, by operat^QU of, such proceedings. In re Sarafford, 15 N. B.. JR. 104. �2. Same— Same.— A bill in the nati^re.iqf a creditor's bill, praying that certain çonveyances of real estate may be declared void, will there- fore be dismissed with Côsts, wheA'flled Ijy a purchaser of the prop- �" erty undeï siich writ of attaehmôfit.' - il' ' . �In Equity. On Bill and Plea. �Nixon, D. J. Moses.Taylor &.GOi, of" New York, claiming to be creditors of William MoUer & Son, of the same place;, on the sixteenth of Septeniiberj 1875, oaused a writ of foreign attachment to be issued outi ôf the circuit ;oourt.of the county of Warren, state of New Jerëey, ieturnable October 5, 1875, and placed it in the hands of the sherifif of said county for execution, who, by virtue of the same, levied upon sundry lots and tracts of land situate at HaCkettstown, as the property of William MoUer, one of the defendants. �Pending these proceedings, and within a few weeks after the return of the writ, to wit, on the twenty-eighth of October, 1875, a petition in bankruptcy was ûled against William Moller, George H. MoUer, and William P. MoUer, as co- partners, and against William Moller individually, and they were adjudged bankrupts on the twentieth of November fol- lowing. William A. Booth was duly appointed their assignee on the thirteenth of December, 1875, to whom an assignment ����
