Birdsong v. Tuttle
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Miller Circuit Court.- C. E. Mitchel, Judge. In this action, which was begun in a justice’s court upon an account for house rent, the plaintiff obtained an order of attachment on the ground that the defendant was a nonresident of this State.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Miller Circuit Court.- C. E. Mitchel, Judge. In this action, which was begun in a justice’s court upon an account for house rent, the plaintiff obtained an order of attachment on the ground that the defendant was a nonresident of this State. The St. L., I. M. & S. Ry. was summoned as garnishee, and answered that at the time the writ of garnishment was served, it was indebted to the defendant in the sum of $78.05. On appeal to the Circuit Court, the plaintiff recovered a judgment for his debt. But the court found that the defendant was a resident of this State, and that the…
1Per curiam
Exemption: Domicile Garnishment A person temporarily residing in another State, who has a domicile in this State,-may claim his exemption of personal property from sale under process, under Sec. 1, Art. 9, of the Constitution of 1874.
The provision is remedial and should be liberally construed. St. L., I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Hart, 38 Ark., 112. The word resident should be accepted in its broader sense.
The act of November 27, 1875, gives no right not granted by this clause, and is constitutional. Winter & Co. v. Simpson et al., 42 Ark., 410.
The judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Parker v. Independence Produce Co.Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1899
- Rancourt v. HahnCuyahoga Circuit Court · 1907