Legal Opinion

Axtell v. Gibbs

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1884PublishedCited by 37 opinions

Error to Kalamazoo. (Mills, J.) Garnishment proceeding. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCooley, C. J.

Tlie defendant'was proceeded against as-garnishee of James O. Gibbs. The proceedings in the case-are given in the preceding opinion. The circuit judge was quite right in dismissing the garnishee proceeding when; the plaintiff *had failed to secure service upon the principal defendant within the statutory period. Noble v. Bourke, 44 Mich. 194. Whatever the plaintiff might do to keep the suit against the principal defendant alive for the purposes of a personal " judgment, did not concern the garnishee ; the proceeding against him was purely statutory, and his hands were tied and his action…

2Cited by37 opinions

  1. Cleveland v. WardTexas Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Ex Parte BurchSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
  3. City of Detroit v. HosmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Clohset v. No Name Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. State v. BlackSupreme Court of Alabama · 1940

32 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