Easton v. Lowery
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before tbe Hon. C. W. Kapieb. The record shows these facts: Wm. C. Easton sued out an original attachment against Cornelius Woodall on the 27th January, 1855, and on the same day' John Lowery was summoned by process of garnishment as the debtor of said Woodall.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile. Tried before tbe Hon. C. W. Kapieb. The record shows these facts: Wm. C. Easton sued out an original attachment against Cornelius Woodall on the 27th January, 1855, and on the same day' John Lowery was summoned by process of garnishment as the debtor of said Woodall. At the ensuing February term-, the garnishee filed a written answer, which was sworn to and subscribed before the clerk of the court on the 13th February, and which is as follows : “ John Lowery, being duly sworn,” &c., “says, that he was not indebted to said Cornelius Woodall at the time…
1Opinion of the CourtBice, C. J.
The first question to be considered is, whether we áre authorized to look to the answer of the garnishee as a part of the record; for, unless we can so regard the answer, it is very clear there is no error in the judgment.
Section 2540 of the Code authorizes the garnishee to answer in writing; but, even when he has done so, secures to the plaintiff the right to require him to be examined orally in the presence of the court. Accordingly, the garnishee in this case filed his answer in writing on the 13th February, 1855 ; but afterwards, and on the 29th June, 1855, he appeared, and answered…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Price v. ThomasonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1847
3Cited by7 opinions
- Burton v. SnyderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1895
- Curry v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1870
- Dudley v. FalknerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1873
- Piper Ice Cream Co. v. J. L. Walker & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1944
- Molton & Falkner v. Escott & SonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1873
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.