Glower v. Glidden Varnish Co.
Supreme Court of Georgia
Attachment. Before Judge Reid. City court of Atlanta. October 10, 1903. An attachment against the Glidden Varnish Company, a non-resident corporation, was executed by service of summons of garnishment on the Ware Manufacturing Company and others.
Read the full summary
Attachment. Before Judge Reid. City court of Atlanta. October 10, 1903. An attachment against the Glidden Varnish Company, a non-resident corporation, was executed by service of summons of garnishment on the Ware Manufacturing Company and others. The garnishee named answered that it owed the defendant a stated sum, of which only a stated part was. due, and that the remainder “falls due in sums of various amounts, at intervals of about thirty days, the same being for merchandise; and when these bills mature, sight drafts are drawn, without exchange, and we pay them by checks on the Neal Loan…
1Opinion of the CourtCandler, J.
This case is identical in principle with those of Henry v. Lennox-Haldeman Co., 116 Ga. 9, Beasley v. Lennox-Haldeman Co., 116 Ga. 13, and High v. Padrosa, 119 Ga. 648. Neither of the cases cited was decided hy a full hench, hut each of them is approved as announcing correct principles of law. Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur. Napier & Gox and J. T. Wright, for plaintiff. Slaton & Phillips, for defendant.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- High v. PadrosaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Henry v. Lennox-Haldeman Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Beasley v. Lennox-Haldeman Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1902
3Cited by1 opinion
- Harvey v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907