Dore v. Dawson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Watt of error to the County Court of Mobile county. Dore, in March, 1841, obtained judgment in the county court of Mobile county against Purvis & Andrews. Upon this, he sued out garnishee process on the 11th March, 1843, against Hannah Gibson, Ira P Taylor and William Taylor, returnable to the then next June term. This process was served on all the garnishees the 13th March.
Read the full summary
Watt of error to the County Court of Mobile county. Dore, in March, 1841, obtained judgment in the county court of Mobile county against Purvis & Andrews. Upon this, he sued out garnishee process on the 11th March, 1843, against Hannah Gibson, Ira P Taylor and William Taylor, returnable to the then next June term. This process was served on all the garnishees the 13th March. The garnishees did not appear at the return of the process, and judgment ni. si. was then given against them. After service of sci. fa., Ira P. and William Taylor appeared and answered, that in the month of February,…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
The rght of the creditor in this case, seems to us to be very clear. The gurmshee process was served on the 13th March, 1843; at which t.me Purvis & Andrews were the owners as well as the payees of the note. The service of the garnishment upon the debtor operated as a lien upon the debt, which could not be affected by any subsequent assignment. In giving effect to the law of attachment, there is no *714difference between debts and personal chattels; and a lien once obtained by service, cannot be discharged by the act of the debt- or. It appears that the assignment to Dawson was not made until the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- National Commercial Bank v. Miller & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- Warfield v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1863
- Randolph v. CarltonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845
- Mayberry & Co. v. MorrisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Kimbrough v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859