Burroughs v. Wright
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. THIS was an action commenced by attachment; by the defendant in-error against the plaintiff in error, on a promissory note.
Read the full summary
Error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. THIS was an action commenced by attachment; by the defendant in-error against the plaintiff in error, on a promissory note. Two persons who were summoned as garnishees, denied by their answers, that they were indebted to, or had effects of the defendant in their hands. ■ At the trial term, a judgment was rendered against the defendant below in these words: “ came the parties by their at-tornies, and the defendant saying nothing in bar or preclusion of the plaintiff’s action, it is therefore considered by the court,” &c. From this judgment the…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
That the appearance of a defendant will *44dispense with service of process, is not denied, but the argument of the counsel for the plaintiff in error is, that there is a distinction between the case of a suit commenced by writ in the ordinary mode, and one commenced by process of attachment, as is the case here. We can perceive no difference between the cases. The object of the attachment is to compel an appearance, by a levy bn the property of the defendant; and he certainly may do that voluntarily, which it was the object of the process to accomplish in another mode. That he did appear and…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Brown v. CoatsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
- Melvin v. ScowleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
- Bates v. Bank of MoultonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Giddens v. BollingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Gill v. DownsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1855
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.