HOME | CATEGORIES | TOC | SURNAME LIST | CARDEN PEOPLE | CARDEN PAGES 

Attachment - Grounds - Non-Residence
  A Methodist preacher assigned to and and living in a district outside his state is a non-resident, within the meaning of the attachment laws, though he intents to return, and still claims a residence in the state, and visits it once or twice a year.

Appeal from superior court, Orange county; R. F Armfield, Judge.
Action by G. G. Carden against J. J. Carden, begun in August, 1888, before a justice of the peace, who issued an order of attachment on an affidavit that defendant was a non-resident. Plaintiff recovered judgment, and defendant appealed to the superior court, where a verdict was given for plaintiff. On defendant's motion the order of attachment was vacated, the court making the following finding and order: "This cause coming on upon motion of the defendant to dissolve and vacate the attachment, it is found by the court, upon the affidavits submitted, that the defendant, by the direction of the bishop of the Methodist Church, was assigned to the Baltimore conference as an itinerant preacher of said church; that he remained in said conference from April, 1884, to March, 1889, intending to return to North Carolina; that the defendant always regarded and considered North Carolina as his home, and visited the same once a year during his absence, and generally oftener; that his absence was of longer duration than was intended or contemplated by the defendant; that defendant always intended to return to his home in North Carolina, and live in said state. Plaintiff asked for a jury to pass upon the residence or non-residence of defendant, which was refused by the court. Upon the foregoing facts, as found by the court, it is adjudged that the attachment be dissolved and vacated.

Plaintiff appeals.
Graham & Winston, for appellant.
J. S. Manning, for appellee.

Shepard, J, The single question presented by this appeal Is whether, upon the facts found, the attachment should have been dissolved. We are unable to distinguish this case from that of Wheeler v. Cobb, 75 N, C, 21. It is there said that, "without deciding who in law is a non-resident in other respects, but confining the decision to a construction of this statute, the conclusion is that where one voluntarily removes from this to another state for the purpose of discharging the duties of an office of indefinite duration, which required his continued presence there for an unlimited time, such a one is a non-resident of this state for the purposes of an attachment. and that, notwithstanding he may occasionally visit this state, and may have the intent to return at some un-certain future time." The prominent idea is "that the debtor must be a non-resident of the state where the attachment is sued out; not that he must be a resident elsewhere, * * * The essential charge is that he is not residing or living in the state, that is, he has no abode or home within it, where process may be served so as effectually to reach him. In other words, his property is attachable if his residence is not such as to subject him personally to the jurisdiction of the court, and place him upon equality with other residents in this respect." Wap. Attachm. 35. We cannot understand how these latter conditions could have existed when the defendant was living in Maryland, visiting this state only once or twice a year and with only a general intention of returning at some indefinite time and making his home here. Non-residence, within the meaning of the attachment law, means the "actual cessation to dwell within a state for an uncertain period, without definite intention as to a time for returning, although a general intention to return may exist." Weitkamp v. Loehr, 53 N. Y. Super. Ct. 83.
Reversed.

Surnames

Disclaimer:  The purpose of this Web Page is to share information for the purpose of research.  I have not proved documentation of all genealogy material, nor have I kept source notes as I should.  But I had lots of fun and met some great people along the way..

If you find any mistakes please contact the Web Page creator, Trisha Carden   , and I shall try to correct them.
 
 

Site copyright 1999, 2000, 2001 Trish S. Carden (Please feel free to use this information but if you do please put a link back to this page)