Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Bolt

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 10, 1932No. 4444PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDrew, J.

This case is before us on a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the appeal is alleged to be from an interlocutory decree, for the further reason that the appeal was taken from a judgment confessed by appellee, and, further, that appellant, the garnishee, is a mere stakeholder and without interest to set up any defense for the real debtor, Mrs. Mary C. Bolt.

The record discloses that E. B. Herndon was made garnishee under a writ of fieri facias based upon a judgment in favor of Bryan E. Bush, assignee, against Mrs-Mary Q. Bolt. The following interrogatories were propounded to the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Daigle v. BirdSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1870
  2. Halpin v. BarringerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1874
  3. Oakey v. Mississippi & Alabama RailroadSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1839
  4. Bolt v. Succession of BoltLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1932

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Johnson v. BoltLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1933
  2. United States v. Allen Brothers of Homer, Inc.District Court, M.D. Louisiana · 1984
  3. Ascension Credit Union v. BabinLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2015
  4. Daniel v. Department of Transportation & DevelopmentLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1981

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API