Willis v. Lyman, Sears & Co.
Texas Supreme Court
Error from G-onzales. Tried below before the Hon. Eield ing Jones. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
We think that the judgment of the court below must be reversed, for the reasons embraced within the second assignment of errors.
*269The second assignment of error, is, “that the affidavit to “petition, was not made by plaintiff, or his attorney; nor was “ it in terms or substance of the statute, and hence not sufficient to compel defendant to answer.”
The statute, (Hart. Dig. Art. 1337,) requires that the affidavit for the writ of garnishment, shall be made by the plaintiff in the judgment, his agent, or attorney.
The petition, in the present case, is signed by “Fly and Fly, attorneys for…
2Cited by33 opinions
- Smith v. Texas Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Buerger v. WellsTexas Supreme Court · 1920
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. v. EarnestCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
- MacKey v. Lucey Products Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1951
- Pure Oil Co. v. Walsh-Woldert Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1931
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.