8 federal hbpoeter. �Steam Stone-Cutter Co. v. Seaes. (Vircuit Cowt, D. Vemiont. October 11, 1881.) �1. Peocbdube — Weits of Bequbsteation in THE Nature of Attachmbnt — �Liens. �Under its rules, this court has the power to issue writs of sequestration in the nature of attachment ; and such ■writs, wlien duly served, create valid liens upon real property in this state so attached, as against a grantee with knowl- edge of the attachment to w hom the property was conveyed pendente lite. �2. Same— Seevice. �Due service is service in the manner provided by the state statutes. �3. Semble that the knowledge or ignorance of the grantee does not afl'ect the valid- �ity of the levy. �In Equity. �Prout e W allier, for orator. �E. J. Phelps and Wm. Batchelder, for defendant. �Wheeler, D. J. The orator, as owner of a patent, brought a bill in this court against the Windsor Manufacturing Company for infringe- ment, and obtained a decree establishing the title to and validity of the patent, the fact of infringement, and for an account of profits. After this decree, on application of the orator a writ of sequestration, in the nature of an attachment, to create a lien for satisfying tho decree, was issued, and served by attaching the real estate of that defendant in accordance with statutes of the state of long standing, which enable the courts of chancery of the state to issue such pro- cess and create such liens. After this attachment, that defendant conveyed to this defendant, who had full knowledge of the attach- ment, a portion of the estate so attached. The orator obtained a final decree for the payment of money in the original cause, took out execution thereon, and caused it to be levied upon that estate, and caused the estate to be set out to the orator in satisfaction of so much of the execution as it would apply to, at its appraised value, agreeable to the statutes of the state in relation to levy of execution upon real eptate. The defendant refuses to recognize the validity of the attachment and levy, and claims to hold the land against them. This bill is brought to confirm and enforce the orator's attachment and levy, and to obtain possession of the estate, and the cause bas been heard upon bill and answer. �No question is made about the propriety or regularity of the writ of attachment issued in this case, if there was authority to issue such a writ at all; nor about the regularity of the attachment upon the writ, or the levy of the execution and setting out the estate by the ��� �
