Conkling v. Young
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Story DistHct ■ Court. — Hon. C. G. Lee, Judge. Action at law upon a promissory note, aided 'by an attachment under which A. C. Enfield and his wife were garnished as debtors of Clara M. Young. ' The State Bank of Maxwell intervened, claiming' that it was entitled to the money due from the garnishees. The case was tried to the court, resulting in a judgment for the garnishee and intervener, and plaintiff appeals. —
1Opinion of the Court
Deemer, J. —
Plaintiff 'brought 'suit against defend* ant, Clara M. Young,' tip on an account for medical services rendered defendant, Clara M. Young, and caused'a writ of attachment to issue, which was served by garnishing Mr. and Mrs. A. C. Enfield. The notice of garnishment was served March 24, 1906, and upon that day the garnishees answered that they were indebted to defendant Young in the sum of $300 upon a promissory note dated February 16, 1903', and due February 16, 1906. Thereafter, and on May 20, 1907, plaintiff filed an amendment to his petition, setting forth the answers made by…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lahn v. KoepSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Harger v. SpoffordSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Marcal v. MellietSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1866
- Ryan v. HeenanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
- Farwell v. TiffanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Federal Land Bank v. JeffersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940
- Goodman Manufacturing Co. v. Mammoth Vein Coal Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- FREEMAN v. TruittMississippi Supreme Court · 1960
- Beed v. BeedSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Eilers v. FrielingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.