Mitchum v. Barksdale
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Mauudin, J., -Aiken, 1921. Action by C. M. Mitchum against J. L. Barksdale et al. Directed verdict for defendants and plaintiff appeals. cite: Courts may require notice to .defendant in garnishment in absence of statute: 12 R. C. L., 830. Prior garnishment in one State bar to subsequent garnishment in another State: 12 R. C. L., 830, 97 Mass., 107, 2 Mills. Const.
Read the full summary
Before Mauudin, J., -Aiken, 1921. Action by C. M. Mitchum against J. L. Barksdale et al. Directed verdict for defendants and plaintiff appeals. cite: Courts may require notice to .defendant in garnishment in absence of statute: 12 R. C. L., 830. Prior garnishment in one State bar to subsequent garnishment in another State: 12 R. C. L., 830, 97 Mass., 107, 2 Mills. Const. Rep., 456. Georgia judgment subject to attack here : 44. S. C., 213. No judgment can be had against garnishee until plaintiff has judgment against defendant: Sec. 5292, Ga. Code; 71 A. S. R., 280. cite: Garnishment…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Coti-iran.
Action upon an account of $375 for goods sold by the plaintiff to the defendants on April 10, 1920, the purchase price being $400, payable $25 cash, which was paid, and $375 on April 12, 1920, two days thereafter. The defendants answered, admitting the debt due by them to the plaintiff, but alleging that it had been attached in their hands under a garnishment proceeding issued by a justice of the peace, returnable to the Superior Court of Richland County, Ga., at the suit of Hankinson & Haigler, upon a claim of $400 due by the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lowenstein v. LevyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
- Rykard v. Seaboard Air Line Ry.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1908