Randell & Co. v. McLain
Supreme Court of Georgia
Bankruptcy. Practice. Lien. Before Judge-Schley. Chatham Superior Court. May Term, 1869. In December, 1867, Randell & Company sued Peter Dunbar and John Franz,, partners, under the style of Dunbar & Franz, in the District Court of the United States, for the District of South Carolina, and on the 21st of August, 1868, obtained a judgment against them.
Read the full summary
Bankruptcy. Practice. Lien. Before Judge-Schley. Chatham Superior Court. May Term, 1869. In December, 1867, Randell & Company sued Peter Dunbar and John Franz,, partners, under the style of Dunbar & Franz, in the District Court of the United States, for the District of South Carolina, and on the 21st of August, 1868, obtained a judgment against them. On the 8th of December, 1868, Randell & Company, in said county, sued out an attachment upon said judgment, and had garnishment served upon Blue & Meyer. They answered that they owed Franz $619 88. About the 1st of January, 1869, Franz was…
1Opinion of the CourtWarner, J.
Thejudgment obtained in the State of South Carolina, in the District Court, could not be collected in this State, except by a suit thereon, at common law, or by process of attachment ; and, in either case, the proceeding instituted to collect the amount of thejudgment debt in this State was mesne process. The 14th section of the Bankrupt Act declares, that the title to the property of the bankrupt shall vest in the assignee, although the same is then attached on mesne process, as the property of the debtor, and shall dissolve any such attachment made within four months next preceding the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Sims, Harrison & Co. v. Jacobson & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1874
- Ward v. . HargettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- In re MoseleyDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 1873