Henkle & Co. v. Bi-Metallic Bank
Colorado Court of Appeals
Appeal from the County Court of El Paso County. Henkel & Company appealed from a judgment entered on the trial of an issue formed by the answer of the Bi-Metallic Bank as garnishee and a traverse of it by the appellants. The proceedings are entirely irregular but a statement of the steps taken is requisite to an understanding of the situation.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the County Court of El Paso County. Henkel & Company appealed from a judgment entered on the trial of an issue formed by the answer of the Bi-Metallic Bank as garnishee and a traverse of it by the appellants. The proceedings are entirely irregular but a statement of the steps taken is requisite to an understanding of the situation. Henkel & Company sued Mcllroy on the 30th of March, 1896. In aid of their suit they filed an affidavit alleging a disposition and removal of his property in fraud of his creditors, filed their undertaking, and the justice issued an attachment writ. On…
1Opinion of the CourtBissell, P. J.
Under the practice established by this court in Nylan v. Renhard, 10 Colo. App. 46, the statement practically determines the case. Many questions are discussed by counsel, but a consideration of a few of the facts and the application of a few well-settled legal principles will dispose of the appeal. The practice adopted by the plaintiffs was entirely irregular and wholly unauthorized. In the case cited Judge Wilson in a very lucid opinion reviews all the statutory provisions regulating and controlling attachment proceedings in justices’ courts. From this opinion it very clearly appears that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Daniels v. Meinhard Bros.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1874
- Fletcher v. PillsburySupreme Court of Vermont · 1861
- Nylan v. RenhardColorado Court of Appeals · 1897
- Fowler v. Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne, & Chicago RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859