Farrell v. Pearson
Illinois Supreme Court
The affidavit of Gustavus C. Pearson, the foundation of this proceeding, states that plaintiffs have recovered judgment against defendants for the sum of $795.90; that execution has been issued and returned unsatisfied.
Read the full summary
The affidavit of Gustavus C. Pearson, the foundation of this proceeding, states that plaintiffs have recovered judgment against defendants for the sum of $795.90; that execution has been issued and returned unsatisfied. That defendants have no property, within the knowledge of the affiant, liable to execution, and that he has just reason to believe that Joseph Farrell is indebted to the said defendants, and has effects and estate of said defendants in his house, and prays garnishee process against Joseph Farrell. Farrell, by his answer, states that he had or has no property belonging to the…
1Opinion of the CourtBreese, J.
It is pretty certain that at the time Farrell was served with the garnishee process at Chicago, he was justly indebted to Clark & Study, the judgment debtors of Pearson & Grace, in the sum of two hundred and fifty-seven dollars, in two notes for flour and horses, purchased of them by Farrell, at Tamaroa, in Perry county. About the time he was garnisheed, his clerk, Watson, at Tamaroa, made some arrangement, unknown to Farrell, by which he gave up the horses to Study, who took them away. This was an unauthorized act by the clerk, and could not tend to release Farrell from the notes. It was not…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Bank of Montreal v. ClarkAppellate Court of Illinois · 1903
- Binkley v. ClayAppellate Court of Illinois · 1904
- Haines v. O'ConnerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1880
- Home Insurance Co. of New York v. KirkAppellate Court of Illinois · 1887
- London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. MossnessAppellate Court of Illinois · 1903
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.