Peet v. Briggs

This is an appeal from a judgment entered against the garnishee, R. A. Briggs, doing business as R. A. Briggs & Sons. Briggs contends that the notice of garnishment purported to have been served on him was not sufficient to sustain the judgment.

Plaintiff obtained a judgment against defendant Davidson. Upon Davidson’s failure to pay, plaintiff attempted to garnishee Davidson’s wages by serving a writ of execution and notice of garnishment directed to “R. A. Briggs, doing business as R. A. Briggs & Sons,” Davidson’s employer. The sheriff’s return to the Avrit states that it was served on “R. A.…