Legal Opinion

Rodes v. Haynes

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1895PublishedCited by 3 opinions

FROM SUMNER. Appeal from Circuit Court of Sumner County. A. H. Munford, J.

1Opinion of the CourtWilkes, J.

This is a garnishment proceeding, in which judgment was rendered in the Court below against the garnishee, upon his answer admitting indebtedness, and the defendants in the original judgment have appealed and assigned errors.

The facts, so far as need be stated, are that Mrs. Ilaynes obtained judgment against the Rodes, had execution issued and returned n/idla bona, and, thereupon, garnisheed Allen, who answered that he was indebted to the Rodes, and had in his hands ¡166.40 of their money, and judgment for the amount was thereupon entered against him, and lie has not appealed. It appears that…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fowler v. HoffmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Holly v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1841
  3. Rose v. BevanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1857
  4. Davis v. MarxMississippi Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Marx v. DavisMississippi Supreme Court · 1879

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dupont Engineering Co. v. Nashville Banner Pub. Co.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1925
  2. Robby's Pancake House of Florida, Inc. v. Walker (In Re Robby's Pancake House of Florida, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1982
  3. Dickenson v. Third National Bank (In re Yates)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API