Connoley v. Cheesborough
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to tbe County Court of Mobile. A. C. Cbeesborough was summoned, on tbe 18th day of April, 1849, as a garnishee at tbe suit of James Counoley, to answer wbat be was indebted to Joseph W. Eurniss.
Read the full summary
Error to tbe County Court of Mobile. A. C. Cbeesborough was summoned, on tbe 18th day of April, 1849, as a garnishee at tbe suit of James Counoley, to answer wbat be was indebted to Joseph W. Eurniss. The garnishee answered that be owed Eurniss $386x4/o, but that on tbe 1st of April, 1849, be bad received a letter from Eurniss, informing him that be bad drawn a draft on him, in favor of Wingate & Breman, for $895. Tbe draft was presented for payment after tbe service of tbe garnishment, but was not paid for tbe reason that tbe debt bad been attached in tbe bands of tbe garnishee, who…
1Opinion of the CourtDargan, C. J.
— To entitle a plaintiff to a judgment against a garnishee upon his answer, it must appear that there is a debt due from the garnishee to the defendant in attach*168ment; and should it appear from tbe answer that the debt bad been assigned before the process of garnishment was executed, and the assignee is not called in to contest his right thereto, as he may be under our statutes, then no judgment can be rendered against the garnishee. Foster, Nastraud et al. v. Walker, 2 Ala. 117; Fortune v. The State Bank, 4 ib. 385; 6 ib. 836.
The sole question in this case, therefore, is, whether we can…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Peyton v. HallettNew York Supreme Court · 1803
- Sims v. SimsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sands & Co. v. Matthews, Finley & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1855