Legal Opinion

Ex parte Woods

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 15, 1841PublishedCited by 8 opinions

This matter came up on motion. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.

It appears that Woods obtained a judgment before a justice of the peace against Headington, and issued process of garnishment against1 John and James McQuaid; both of whom were represented to be indebted to Headington. The process was never served upon John McQuaid, nor any notice given him of the proceedings instituted : judgment however was rendered against both, as by default.

The Statute declares that the writ, if issued by a justice, shall be directed to the proper constable, and shall be served and returned in the same manner as writs of summons; viz: by reading the same to the…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hunt's Heirs v. Ellison's HeirsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
  2. Ex parte AnthonySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1844
  3. Harris v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1895
  4. Central Coal & Coke Co. v. Texas Produce Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
  5. Ex parte PileSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1849

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API