Legal Opinion

Frank v. Dungan

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 21, 1905PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court. Edward W. Winkirud, Judge. Garnishment proceedings based upon a judgment that is void for want of jurisdiction are also void. 2 Shinn, Attachments and Garnishments, § 660; 37 III. App. 393; 26 Ind. 441; 24 Ohio St. 481; 59 Texas, 3.

1Opinion of the CourtMcCurroch, J.

Appellees, Dungan & See, recovered judgment in the circuit court, on appeal from a justice of the peace, against Duke White for the sum of $114, and subsequently filed allegations and interrogations, and caused a writ of granishment to be issued and served on appellant, Aaron Frank, requiring him to answer in what sums he was indebted to said White, etc. Appellant answered the garnishment on the return day of the writ, stating that he had become indebted to said White in the sum of $42 for salary from the date of service of the writ of garnishment until the return day thereof, but that White…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Tuttle v. CampbellMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Chamblee v. McKenzieSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1876
  3. Parks & Co. v. WebbSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
  4. Stanley v. BrachtSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1883
  5. St. L., I. M. & S. Ry. v. BriggsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1885

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. El Dorado & Bastrop Railroad v. WhatleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
  2. Withem v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  3. District Grand Lodge No. 11 v. PrattSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
  4. Hill v. First National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
  5. Kinslow v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908

4 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