Leroy M. Wiley & Co. v. Sledge
Supreme Court of Georgia
Attachment, in Muscogee Superior Court. Decision by Judge Alexander, May Term, 1850. This was an attachment sued out by L. M. Wiley & Co. against Nathaniel Sledge, one of the partners of the firm of Birdsong & Sledge, on the ground that Sledge was actually removing beyond the limits of the State. There was a verdict for plaintiff and appeal.
Read the full summary
Attachment, in Muscogee Superior Court. Decision by Judge Alexander, May Term, 1850. This was an attachment sued out by L. M. Wiley & Co. against Nathaniel Sledge, one of the partners of the firm of Birdsong & Sledge, on the ground that Sledge was actually removing beyond the limits of the State. There was a verdict for plaintiff and appeal. Defendant, by his counsel, then moved to quash the attachment on various grounds which were sustained by the Court and excepted to by plaintiffs. The only ground relied on in the Supreme Court is, that an attachment will not lie against one partner for a…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Lumpkin, J.
delivering the opinion.
[1.] The only question in this case is, whether, when one of the members of a firm, transacting business in Georgia, resides out of the State, an attachment will lie against him on a firm debt, to be levied on the partnership effects %
The case is not without its difficulties. We think, however, that the attachment will not, ordinarily, lie.
This summary remedy is allowed only against the debtor of the plaintiff in attachment. Here the debtor is the firm of Birdsong & Sledge, and not Nathaniel Sledge, individually. For this simple reason alone, it…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Winston v. EwingSupreme Court of Alabama · 1840
- Conklin v. HarrisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1843
3Cited by3 opinions
- Andrews v. MundyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1892
- Whitfield v. HoveySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1889
- Clark v. MaddoxCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1930