Triest v. J. G. Watts & Bro.
Supreme Court of Georgia
Lien. Judgments. Principal and Security. Before Judge Tompkins. Chatham Superior Court. May Term, 1876. Watts & Bro. foreclosed a lien on a saw-mill owned by McLeod & Bro., under the provisions of the act of February 21st, 1873. A levy was made and counter-affidavit filed by McLeod & Bro. Triest & Herman, and George G. Wilson, became securities on the replevy bond.
Read the full summary
Lien. Judgments. Principal and Security. Before Judge Tompkins. Chatham Superior Court. May Term, 1876. Watts & Bro. foreclosed a lien on a saw-mill owned by McLeod & Bro., under the provisions of the act of February 21st, 1873. A levy was made and counter-affidavit filed by McLeod & Bro. Triest & Herman, and George G. Wilson, became securities on the replevy bond. Upon the above issue the jury found for the plaintiffs $2,233.06, with interest, “ this amount being a lien as claimed by plaintiffs.” Judgment was thereupon entered against the defendants and the securities on the replevy bond,…
1Opinion of the Court
Bleckley, Judge.
1. A fi. fa. for the summary enforcement of a lien on specific personalty, such as a saw-mill, may be arrested by a creditor of the defendant, as well as by the defendant himself, and this whether the property is replevied or not. Code, §1991, par. 4. It follows that the judgment upon the verdict deciding the issue must, in some cases, be a special judgment against the property, and cannot be a general judgment against the defendant. There is no provision of law (as there is in attachment proceedings) for one spe*76cies of judgment in some cases, and for another species in other…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Houston Real Estate Investment Co. v. HechlerUtah Supreme Court · 1914
- Argo v. FieldsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Bitt International Co. v. FletcherCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2003
- Barnett v. TantSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Downs v. BedfordCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.