Legal Opinion

Morrison v. Hilburn & Poole

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided July 30, 1906PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Certiorari. Before Judge Pendleton. Fulton superior court. February 1, 1906.

1Opinion of the CourtCobb, P. J.

1. When an affidavit is made by an attorney at law as the foundation of a garnishment proceeding, it is not necessary that it should state that the plaintiff has reason to apprehend the loss of the sum claimed or some part thereof unless process of garnishment issue. A statement that the affiant has reason to so apprehend is sufficient. Civil Code, § 4708. The affidavit in Knox v. Summers, 66 Ga. 256, was held defective because it contained the statement that the attorney at law had reason to believe that his client would apprehend the loss of the sum claimed or some part thereof unless…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Jarrell v. GuannSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Nashville, Chattanooga & Saint Louis Railway v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  2. Caldwell Backing & T. Co. v. PorterOregon Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Gammage v. PerryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
  4. Butler v. FloydSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937
  5. Fagan v. Jackson & OrmeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907

7 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