Legal Opinion

Bowden v. Scott

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 19, 1919No. 10059PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Certiorari; from Bibb superior court—Judge Mathews. July 19, 1918.

1Opinion of the CourtLuke, J.

This is a suit on a forthcoming bond given by a claimant in attachment; and to entitle the plaintiff to recover there must have been a breach of the bond. There was no such breach, since there never was a fi. fa. in the attachment ease. Nor was there a judgment or fi. fa. in the claim case. A judgment in attachment can be enforced only by execution. Civil Code (1910), § 5122. See also Rogers v. McDill, 9 Ga. 506. The plaintiff seeks to avoid this result by saying that there was a breach because the property was not produced on demand and was dissipated. This contention is, however, unsound,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hatton v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  2. Lassiter v. Byrd & CokerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1876
  3. Rogers v. McDillSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Manufacturers Finance Acceptance Corp. v. BradleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API