ART. 9] FOR UNLIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND TORTS. 219'

of issuing it; and the plaintiff shall give notice of the issuing of such
attachment in the same manner as in case of attachments before a justice-
against non-resident or absconding debtors; and a writ of summons
shall also be issued with such attachment, as -is usual in cases of debt
before a justice, and the proceedings on such attachment shall conform
as near as practicable to the practice and proceedings under writs of
attachment against non-resident or absconding debtors, issued by a
justice of the peace.

See notes to sections 36 and 39.

See art. 52, sec. 43, et seq.; also. art. 52, sec. 71.

Attachments in Actions Ex Contractu for Unliquidated Damages
and in Actions for Wrongs Independent of Contract.

1904, art. 9. sec. 44. 1888, art 9, sec. 43. 18S8. ch. 507.
44. Attachments may also be issued against non-resident or abscond
ing debtors in cases arising ex contractu, where the damages are unliqui-
dated, and in actions for wrongs independent of contract; but in suck
cases no attachments shall issue until a, declaration shall have been filed,
setting out specially and in detail the breach of contract complained
of, or the tort actually committed, verified by the affidavit of the plain-
tiff or some one on his behalf, and until a bond shall be filed, similar
in all respects to the bond required to be given in cases of attachments
on original process for fraud, as prescribed by section 39 of this article.
In cases arising under this section, the practice and pleadings shall in
all other particulars conform to the practice and proceedings against
non-resident and absconding debtors in actions ex contractu for liqui-
dated damages.

When damages are unliquidated.

Whether damages for breach of contract are liquidated or unliquidated,
depends on whether the contract itself fixes the amount, or furnishes a
standard by which the amount may be determined with sufficient certainty to
enable the plaintiff to make oath to his claim. And damages are not unliqui-
dated because less than is claimed may be ultimately recovered—matters of
defence in mitigation of damages, do not affect the standard of damages.
Dirickson v. Showeli, 79 Md. 53; Warwick v. Chase, 23 Md. 160. See also,
Smithson v. U. S. Telegraph Co.. 29 Md. 166; Steuart v. Chappell, 98 Md.
531; Keen v. Whittingdon, 40 Md. 497; Blick v. Mercantile Trust Co., 113
Md. 490.

An attachment by a lawyer for professional services, in the absence of an
agreement as to the amount to be paid, is for unliquidated damages, and
the procedure must follow this section. Steuart v. Chappell, 98 Md. 531.

Damages arising from a breach of a complicated agreement embracing
ninny things to be performed, are unliquidated. Hough v. Kugler, 36 Md. 194.

And see notes to sec. 4.

Generally.

This section applies to an original proceeding only, and can not be made
ancillary to an attachment on two non ests. An affidavit (as prescribed in
section 4). must accompany the declaration, account and bond. Steuart v.
Chappell. 100 Md. 541.

And see notes to sec. 39.