Common Pleas, Philadelphia County.[1]
June Term, 1784.
M’Carty verſus Nixon et al.
This action was commenced returnable to the enſuing term, and now, Auguſt 6th, previous to the return of the writ, the plaintiff moves for a ſpecial court, under the new act, for granting ſpecial courts to plaintiffs.—Lewis and Ingerſol for the plaintiff—Wilſon and Wilcocks for the defendant.
The Court denied the motion, the defendant not being in court, nor the action depending for this purpoſe, till bail filed, or an appearance entered.
Ingerſol in arguing on the expreſſion in the laſt act, “action depending,” took this diſtinction—Where the original writ is purchaſed out of Chancery, the ſuit cannot be ſaid to be depending until the return; becauſe the writ gives the juriſdiction, and before the return, the court does not know the cauſe.—This is the caſe
- ↑ As the following caſe may give ſome ſatisfaction to our ſiſter ſtates, I hope the inſertion of it here, will not be deemed an improper deviation from my intention, to confine the reports of deciſions in the Common Pleas, to thoſe which have occurred ſince the appointment of Mr. Preſident Shippen:—particularly, as I have reaſon to believe, that the principle of this adjudication, met with the approbation of all the judges of the Supreme Court.
Common Pleas, Philadelphia County.
September Term, 1781.
Simon Nathan verſus the Commonwealth of Virginia.
A foreign attachment was iſſued againſt the commonwealth of Virginia, at the ſuit of Simon Nathan: and a quantity of cloathing, imported from France, be-
