Hannahan v. Nichols
Supreme Court of Georgia
In Equity, in Baker Superior Court. Decision by Judge Andrews, November Term, 1854. Hannahan filed a bill, alleging that in 1853, by his agent, he sold to Nichols a negro for $1100, and took his note, with one Delancey as surety.
Read the full summary
In Equity, in Baker Superior Court. Decision by Judge Andrews, November Term, 1854. Hannahan filed a bill, alleging that in 1853, by his agent, he sold to Nichols a negro for $1100, and took his note, with one Delancey as surety. That Nichols agreed to furnish materials and build a gin-house for complainant by a certain time, for which he was to have a credit on the note of $600. That this contract was the principal object of selling the negro, and Nichols was unable otherwise to pay for him. That Nichols had failed to comply with the contract, and that he and Delancey are insolvent and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Running, J.
delivering the opinion.
[1.] “ A ne exeat regno issues only where the claim upon the party going abroad is equitable, and it will be refused upon a mere demand at Law for mo.ney, ‘for there’ it is said ‘the defendant may be arrested and obliged to give bail, who will be liable unless they surrender him; and-he may be as easily taken by that process as on a writ of ‘ ne exeat regno.’ ” (3 Daniel’s Ch. Pr. 375.)
The demand, in this case, was a debt for $1100, secured by a promissory note. It was one, therefore, on which Nichols, the principal in the note, might have been…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Tumlin v. VanhornSupreme Court of Georgia · 1887