
    Horton v. Horton.
    September Term, 1808.
    Decrees — Attachment to Enforce against Person Out of State — When Enforceable after Return. — An attachment to enforce a decree pronounced against a person who was out of the Commonwealth, cannot be awarded against him. after his return, until twelve months have elapsed from the time of service of a copy of such decree.
    In March, 180S, a decree was pronounced in this case. The defendant was out of the Common wealth at that time; and, of course, under the 4th section of the *act directing the method of proceeding against absent defendants, (1 Rev. Code, p. US,) he was entitled to the term of seven year to appear and petition for a rehearing. Some time in the present year he returned, and appeared openly; and, on the 19th of August last, was served with a copy of the decree, which was not complied with; and thereupon the plaintiff moved for an attachment.
    
      
      See ’ monographic note on “Attachments” appended to Lancaster v. Wilson, 27 Gratt. 624.
    
   By the Chancellor.

By the 4th section of the act directing the method of proceeding in cases like the present, it is clearly stated that the defendant may, within twelve months after the service of the decree, appear in Court, and petition to have the cause reheard; and therefore should not be attached until the expiration of that time.

Attachment denied.  