Legal Opinion

Simplex Machine Co. v. Greenberg & Bond Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 14, 1918No. 9366PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Certiorari; from Fulton' superior court—Judge Bell. October 3, 1917.

1Opinion of the Court

Beoyles, JP. J.

1. An answer to a summons of garnishment, made at the proper term of court, is amendable. Burrus v. Moore, 63 Ga. 405; Plant v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 92 Ga. 636 (19 S. E. 719); Dannenberg Co. v. Adler-May Co., 137 Ga. 111 (72 S. E. 906).

2.. The original answer of the garnishee in "this case was as follows: “Georgia, Eulton County. Now comes garnishee in above-stated case, and in answer to the summons of garnishment served on said garnishee says: (1) Since the service of saifl summons of garnishment said defendant has filed his voluntary petition in bankruptcy in the U. S. court…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Plant & Son v. Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1893
  2. Burrus & Williams v. MooreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
  3. Dannenberg Co. v. Adler-May Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1911
  4. Fitzpatrick Co. v. ShepherdCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ownby v. WagerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
  2. Snooks v. Factory Square, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
  3. Banning Cotton Mills v. George Muse Clothing Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
  4. Mabry v. ManneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
  5. Savannah Bank & Trust Co. v. KeaneCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API