Hartman v. Stark
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah.: George Tazwell, Judge. Department 2. J. L. Hartman and E. L. Thompson are partners, doing business under the firm name of Hartman & Thompson. November 22, 1918, the firm commenced an action in the Circuit Court of Multnomah County against W. T. Lambert, to recover the amount of his certain note, interest, and attorney’s fees.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah.: George Tazwell, Judge. Department 2. J. L. Hartman and E. L. Thompson are partners, doing business under the firm name of Hartman & Thompson. November 22, 1918, the firm commenced an action in the Circuit Court of Multnomah County against W. T. Lambert, to recover the amount of his certain note, interest, and attorney’s fees. An affidavit and bond for an attachment was duly filed, based upon which a writ was duly issued, directed to the sheriff of that county, acting under which, that officer served a garnishee notice upon Kittie M. Stark in person and as executrix of the…
1Opinion of the CourtJohns, J.
1, 2. The facts are peculiar. Plaintiff’s judgment in the Circuit Court is based upon the promissory note which it held against Lambert. In an effort to collect its claim against him, a garnishee notice was served upon Kittie M. Stark personally, and as .executrix of her deceased husband. In response to the notice she made answer to the effect that she did not have any property belonging to Lambert in her possession or under her control. Plaintiff then filed written allegations and interrogatories', to which she then made answer that at one time she did have forty shares of stock in the Union…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bembridge v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1963
- Richey v. StanleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Hilbig v. Central Glass Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1991
- Malan v. TiptonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009