Dorr v. Schmidt & Zeigler
Supreme Court of Florida
Writ of Error to the Circuit Court for Escambia county. The facts in the case are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Mabry, C. J.:
There is involved in this case the validity of an assignment for the benefit of creditors, made under the original act of 1889, Chapter 3891 laws of Florida. In December, 1891, Schmidt & Zeigler commenced suit against R. M, Avery and had garnishment process served on C. H. Dorr, with the view of reaching money or property in his hands belonging to Avery. Judgment was entered in favor of Schmidt & Zeigler against Avery for $574.97, and the garnishee, Dorr, answered that he did not owe Avery anything, nor did he have possession of any money or other property of any kind *356belonging…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Dunham v. . WatermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Frank v. MyersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
- Jessup v. . HulseNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Keep v. SandersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853
- Clark v. FewSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rogers v. Boise Ass'n of Credit MenIdaho Supreme Court · 1921
- Armour v. DoigSupreme Court of Florida · 1903