Legal Opinion

Tyler v. Akerman

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided May 12, 1923PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhitfield, J.

This writ of error was taken, to- a judgment quashing a writ of garnishment as to the municipality.

The statute provides that “Every person who shall have brought a suit to recover a debt or shall have recovered a judgment in any suit in any court of this State against any person, natural or corporate, shall have a right to a writ of garnishment, in the manner hereinafter provided, to subject any indebtedness due to the defendant by a third person, and any goods, money, chattels or effects of the defendants in the hands, possession or control of a third person. The officers, agents and…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Duval County v. Charleston Lumber & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1903
  2. Switzer v. City of WellingtonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
  3. Welch Lumber Co. v. Carter Bros. & BirdWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Michigan Lumber & Manufacturing Co. v. Duval County GarnisheeSupreme Court of Florida · 1903

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. City of Lakeland v. AmosSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
  2. Ake v. ChanceySupreme Court of Florida · 1943
  3. City of Miami v. SpurrierDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975
  4. Cadle Co. v. G & G ASSOCIATESDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1999
  5. Bailey v. BaronDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1972

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API