Legal Opinion

Goode v. Holcombe

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 15, 1860PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal froiil tile Circuit Court of Shelby'. Tbe record dobs not show the name of the presiding-, judge.

1Opinion of the CourtR. W. Walter, J.

To authorize a final judgment against a garnishee, who has not answered, a judgment nisi must be first entered against-him, and then a scire facias issued thereupon, must be executed and returned j or two such notices must be returned “not found” by tbe sheriff of the county in which tbe garnishment was executed, Code, § 2545; Lowry v. Clements, 9 Ala. 422; Wood v. Russell, 22 Ala. 645; Dew v. Bank, 9 Ala. 323. In this case, tile garnishee- Goode did- not answer and, without rendering the conditional judgment, and issuing the scire facias required 'by tile statute,^ the court entered a final…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lowry v. ClementsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
  2. Dew v. Bank of the StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
  3. Wood v. RussellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Holland-Blow Stave Co. v. WhitmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  2. Ex Parte National Lumber Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API